I will also have to re-think my support of Fifa's stand on video-evidence, after my embedded video clip of the Argentine -off-sides goal was blocked, because it contained content that belonged to the Association. Boo.
Enjoy the rest.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Rest Days
Off until Friday, when we will discuss Fifa, geography and rank (space and power) during the Quarter-Finals.
I will also have to re-think my support of Fifa's stand on video-evidence, after my embedded video clip of the Argentine -off-sides goal was blocked, because it contained content that belonged to the Association. Boo.
Enjoy the rest.
I will also have to re-think my support of Fifa's stand on video-evidence, after my embedded video clip of the Argentine -off-sides goal was blocked, because it contained content that belonged to the Association. Boo.
Enjoy the rest.
Monday, June 28, 2010
Bad calls are a part of life
As expected, The Netherlands and Brazil won easily in Monday’s matches. Tuesday’s games could be more interesting. Paraguay and Japan play first (10AM Eastern Time) followed by Spain and Portugal at 2:30PM.
The really hot stuff happens this weekend, when four of the strongest teams face off in the Quarter-Finals. Holland plays Brazil (gasp) and Argentina plays Germany.
Most of the Cup-Commentary since yesterday has focused on two calls (or lack thereof) by the referees, each of which influenced the goal counts –but in my opinion failed to influence the outcome of the games.
The first was a shot by England that appeared, from our God’s Eye View (i.e. ESPN) to bounce off the crossbar, land inside the goal, bounce up again against the cross bar, land outside the goal where it was caught by the German goalkeeper.
The second questionable call—rather lack of a call---was the failure to find the Argentine player off-sides, and therefore allowing this goal:
Germany beat England 4-1, and Argentina beat Mexico 3-1, so in each case the call, or lack thereof, failed to influence the outcome of the game. Let’s face it: the best team won each match.
There’s a larger debate concerning the use of video as evidence to review calls. In the war crimes courts I study, photography, video, and satellite imagery are quite often used as evidence, and just as often the ‘truths’ told are contested. Judges and expert witnesses carefully consider the interpretations prosecutors and defendants make of images presented as evidence. In a war crimes trial, it is appropriate to take the time to study the photographic images very carefully before determining what actually happened.
I agree with Fifa (shocking!) that the sport is best served by relying on the referees’ judgment on the pitch, so that the play can go on.
As in real life, sometimes we suffer a bad judgment call. It’s all part of the game.
The really hot stuff happens this weekend, when four of the strongest teams face off in the Quarter-Finals. Holland plays Brazil (gasp) and Argentina plays Germany.
Most of the Cup-Commentary since yesterday has focused on two calls (or lack thereof) by the referees, each of which influenced the goal counts –but in my opinion failed to influence the outcome of the games.
The first was a shot by England that appeared, from our God’s Eye View (i.e. ESPN) to bounce off the crossbar, land inside the goal, bounce up again against the cross bar, land outside the goal where it was caught by the German goalkeeper.
The second questionable call—rather lack of a call---was the failure to find the Argentine player off-sides, and therefore allowing this goal:
Germany beat England 4-1, and Argentina beat Mexico 3-1, so in each case the call, or lack thereof, failed to influence the outcome of the game. Let’s face it: the best team won each match.
There’s a larger debate concerning the use of video as evidence to review calls. In the war crimes courts I study, photography, video, and satellite imagery are quite often used as evidence, and just as often the ‘truths’ told are contested. Judges and expert witnesses carefully consider the interpretations prosecutors and defendants make of images presented as evidence. In a war crimes trial, it is appropriate to take the time to study the photographic images very carefully before determining what actually happened.
I agree with Fifa (shocking!) that the sport is best served by relying on the referees’ judgment on the pitch, so that the play can go on.
As in real life, sometimes we suffer a bad judgment call. It’s all part of the game.
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Blowouts
This coming week provides some relief on the World Cup vs. Real Life balance.
The next few games should be blow-outs like today’s Germany/England (4-1) game, or at least clear victories like Argentina’s 3-1 win over Mexico.
On Monday, you can go back to work and follow the matches out of the corner of your eye online. The Netherlands should dispose of Slovakia (10AM--ESPN gives the Dutch 89.6% chance of winning), and Brazil should defeat Chile (2:30PM).
Tuesday’s matches look good. Paraguay and Japan play first (10AM Eastern Time) followed by Spain and Portugal at 2:30Pm. Wednesday and Thursday are rest days. The Quarter Finals are Friday July 2nd and Saturday July 3rd, followed by two more rest days, allowing for time to ease back into regular schedules.
The rest days will allow for some time to work on certain questions that have been pestering me as I explore the geography of the 2010 World Cup.
1) Gender Apartheid. Where are the women? All I’ve seen are female fans. Occasionally young girls appear as part of the kid’s parade for the teams’ entrances and anthems. Granted, my observations are critically influenced by the fact that ESPN is my main access to the games. But all (but one) of the announcers have been male. So are the commentators, the referees, and the coaching staff. As far as I can tell, the bodies underneath the bulky Fifa Vests of the stretcher crews have been male. What’s up with that? Given that the 2010 is arguably the most extensive global event ever, where are the women? Can the World Cup be 99.9% male and still be considered ‘global’?
2) Public Patriots and Private Players. What is the relationship between the national teams and the private clubs? Do the players get paid to play (and train) for the national teams, and if so how much, and how much in relation to the salaries of the private clubs? My hunch is that both the public and private sector are heavily inter-dependent, meaning the national teams rely on the functioning of the private sector and vice-versa. Rather than existing in separate, contrasting domains, the public and the private are mutually-constituted.
3) FIFA and RSA. I’ve heard reports that the South African government invested more than 3 Billion dollars to host the tournament, but that Fifa stands to reap the billions in profit. WTF?
The next few games should be blow-outs like today’s Germany/England (4-1) game, or at least clear victories like Argentina’s 3-1 win over Mexico.
On Monday, you can go back to work and follow the matches out of the corner of your eye online. The Netherlands should dispose of Slovakia (10AM--ESPN gives the Dutch 89.6% chance of winning), and Brazil should defeat Chile (2:30PM).
Tuesday’s matches look good. Paraguay and Japan play first (10AM Eastern Time) followed by Spain and Portugal at 2:30Pm. Wednesday and Thursday are rest days. The Quarter Finals are Friday July 2nd and Saturday July 3rd, followed by two more rest days, allowing for time to ease back into regular schedules.
The rest days will allow for some time to work on certain questions that have been pestering me as I explore the geography of the 2010 World Cup.
1) Gender Apartheid. Where are the women? All I’ve seen are female fans. Occasionally young girls appear as part of the kid’s parade for the teams’ entrances and anthems. Granted, my observations are critically influenced by the fact that ESPN is my main access to the games. But all (but one) of the announcers have been male. So are the commentators, the referees, and the coaching staff. As far as I can tell, the bodies underneath the bulky Fifa Vests of the stretcher crews have been male. What’s up with that? Given that the 2010 is arguably the most extensive global event ever, where are the women? Can the World Cup be 99.9% male and still be considered ‘global’?
2) Public Patriots and Private Players. What is the relationship between the national teams and the private clubs? Do the players get paid to play (and train) for the national teams, and if so how much, and how much in relation to the salaries of the private clubs? My hunch is that both the public and private sector are heavily inter-dependent, meaning the national teams rely on the functioning of the private sector and vice-versa. Rather than existing in separate, contrasting domains, the public and the private are mutually-constituted.
3) FIFA and RSA. I’ve heard reports that the South African government invested more than 3 Billion dollars to host the tournament, but that Fifa stands to reap the billions in profit. WTF?
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Brackets and knock-outs
This next phase of the tournament, the Round of 16, is the first knock-out round. We are done with ties. In the event of a draw, two 15 minutes additional periods are played. If the teams remain tied, the match is decided by a shoot-out of penalty kicks.
Group winners will play against runners-up from another group, for example Winner Group C versus Runner-up Group D (USA v. Ghana). The winners will advance to play teams on their side of the ‘bracket.’ The defeated team is out of the World Cup.
There are two sides in the bracket; eight teams each. The biggest issue is how to get past Brazil on one side of the bracket, and Germany and Argentina on the other.
On the ‘Left’ side (at least as my pdf prints) is:
Uruguay
South Korea (now eliminated)
USA
Ghana
The Netherlands
Slovakia
Brazil
Chile
Eight teams on the 'Right' side:
Argentina
Mexico
Germany
England
Paraguay
Japan
Spain
Portugal
or print out your own copy:
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/world-cup/bracket?cc=5901&ver=us
Remember:
Sunday, June 27th
10AM, Germany v. England
2:30PM, Argentina v. Mexico
The schedule for your working week:
Monday, June 28th:
10AM Netherlands v. Slovakia
2:30 PM Brazil v. Chile
Tuesday, June 29th:
10AM Paraguay v. Japan
2:30 PM Spain v. Portugal
Group winners will play against runners-up from another group, for example Winner Group C versus Runner-up Group D (USA v. Ghana). The winners will advance to play teams on their side of the ‘bracket.’ The defeated team is out of the World Cup.
There are two sides in the bracket; eight teams each. The biggest issue is how to get past Brazil on one side of the bracket, and Germany and Argentina on the other.
On the ‘Left’ side (at least as my pdf prints) is:
Uruguay
South Korea (now eliminated)
USA
Ghana
The Netherlands
Slovakia
Brazil
Chile
Eight teams on the 'Right' side:
Argentina
Mexico
Germany
England
Paraguay
Japan
Spain
Portugal
or print out your own copy:
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/world-cup/bracket?cc=5901&ver=us
Remember:
Sunday, June 27th
10AM, Germany v. England
2:30PM, Argentina v. Mexico
The schedule for your working week:
Monday, June 28th:
10AM Netherlands v. Slovakia
2:30 PM Brazil v. Chile
Tuesday, June 29th:
10AM Paraguay v. Japan
2:30 PM Spain v. Portugal
The Fog of Futbol
Friday’s final day of group play was anti-climatic after such an exciting week. Brazil and Portugal settled with their draw, 0-0 (yawn), which puts them both through to the Round of 16. They seemed to have come to a gentleman’s agreement to hold back. Although the Ivory Coast beat North Korea (which was out of reach of advancement anyway), the 3-0 victory failed to move the team forward. Chile and Spain seemed to have settled their differences by the 55th minute and just played to finish (like the Brazil/Portugal game). Chile did well with ten players after an ambiguous red-card, and the Portuguese racked up numerous yellow cards as well which could hurt next week.
The Schadenfreude inspired by the upset of 2006 World Cup Champions (Italy) and the 2nd place team (France), provided a boast, but now the tournament is in a bit of a funk. Maybe it is just that last day of marginal play. Maybe it is just the result of watching too much TV in general and ESPN in particular.
The Fog of Futbal has been a huge distraction from other things, like work, family problems and the really bad news around the world. It is like TV and Sport combine into a Marx/Chomsky cocktail of opium and the manufacture of passivity/consent. Televised sports are what we have so we can feel sorry for millionaire idols when they lose. Maybe that’s why newspapers and magazines advertise Angela and Brad’s divorce with such glee---we feel good, feeling sorry for the elite.
We can occupy ourselves with how much the rich, famous and athletic are suffering as a way to avoid all this bad news, for example;
1) From June 26th New York Times:
WASHINGTON — Stymied by political opposition and focused on competing priorities, the Obama administration has sidelined efforts to close the Guantánamo prison, making it unlikely that President Obama will fulfill his promise to close it before his term ends in 2013.
2) Juan Cole on www.juancole.com shares:
3) And of course the Permanent War(s).
The Schadenfreude inspired by the upset of 2006 World Cup Champions (Italy) and the 2nd place team (France), provided a boast, but now the tournament is in a bit of a funk. Maybe it is just that last day of marginal play. Maybe it is just the result of watching too much TV in general and ESPN in particular.
The Fog of Futbal has been a huge distraction from other things, like work, family problems and the really bad news around the world. It is like TV and Sport combine into a Marx/Chomsky cocktail of opium and the manufacture of passivity/consent. Televised sports are what we have so we can feel sorry for millionaire idols when they lose. Maybe that’s why newspapers and magazines advertise Angela and Brad’s divorce with such glee---we feel good, feeling sorry for the elite.
We can occupy ourselves with how much the rich, famous and athletic are suffering as a way to avoid all this bad news, for example;
1) From June 26th New York Times:
WASHINGTON — Stymied by political opposition and focused on competing priorities, the Obama administration has sidelined efforts to close the Guantánamo prison, making it unlikely that President Obama will fulfill his promise to close it before his term ends in 2013.
2) Juan Cole on www.juancole.com shares:
3) And of course the Permanent War(s).
Friday, June 25, 2010
'African' World Cup
As usual The Daily Show does it best.
Here's the spoof on the 'African' Cup theme:
The other global sporting event that invades our household (and has justified the cable tv) is the Dakar Rally, an off road vehicle race.
"The Dakar" originally began in Paris, France and ended in Dakar, Senegal. Here is an image of the traditional route, as run in 2007:
Due to security concerns the 2008 Dakar was cancelled. In 2009, the event moved to Argentina/Chile, but persisted in calling itself "The Dakar."
Despite shifting to another continent, the sponsors stuck with the 'Dakar' name, the same tasteless logo of a head-statue wrapped in some generic ethnic cloth, and the annoying indigenous-esque font.
Images stolen from www.dakar.com, the official site of the rally.
Here's the spoof on the 'African' Cup theme:
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| World Cup 2010: Into Africa - Goal Diggers | ||||
| ||||
The other global sporting event that invades our household (and has justified the cable tv) is the Dakar Rally, an off road vehicle race.
"The Dakar" originally began in Paris, France and ended in Dakar, Senegal. Here is an image of the traditional route, as run in 2007:
Due to security concerns the 2008 Dakar was cancelled. In 2009, the event moved to Argentina/Chile, but persisted in calling itself "The Dakar."
Despite shifting to another continent, the sponsors stuck with the 'Dakar' name, the same tasteless logo of a head-statue wrapped in some generic ethnic cloth, and the annoying indigenous-esque font.
Images stolen from www.dakar.com, the official site of the rally.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Italians follow the French home, the Dutch look golden
The only way things could look better for the Dutch is if Portugal manages to beat Brazil on Friday. If Portugal nudges Brazil into the G2 position, it could give The Netherlands the most advantageous route toward the final game.
In the event that Portugal leads group G, the tournament’s heavy-hitters (Brazil, Germany, Spain and Argentina) could end up playing/eliminating each other on the way to the final. The team that emerges from a Spanish/Brazilian/German/Argentina battle would probably be pretty wiped out by the time it came up against The Netherlands on July 11th. Hup Holland!
Here’s the schedule and permutations for the last day of Group play on Friday, June 25th:
10AM
Brazil v. Portugal
North Korea v. Ivory Coast
2:30PM
Spain v. Chile
Switzerland v. Honduras
I’d recommend the first game listed given the scenarios:
GROUP G
Brazil has advanced. Wins group with: (A) Win or tie versus Portugal
Portugal advances with: (A) Win or tie versus Brazil (B) Loss IF Ivory Coast does not win AND make up goal difference
Ivory Coast advances with: (A) Win versus North Korea AND Portugal loss AND make up goal difference
North Korea has been eliminated.
GROUP H
Chile advances with: (A) Win or tie versus Spain (also wins group) (B) Loss and Switzerland tie or loss (C) Loss and Switzerland win and maintain tiebreakers over Switzerland
Spain advances with: (A) Win versus Chile (B) Tie and Switzerland tie or loss (C) Loss and Honduras win and maintain tiebreakers over Switzerland and Honduras
Switzerland advances with: (A) Win and Spain tie or loss (B) Win and Spain win and make up tiebreakers on Chile (C) Tie and Spain loss (D) Loss and Spain loss and hold tiebreakers over Spain and Honduras
Honduras advances with: (A) Win and Chile win and make up tiebreakers on Spain and Switzerland
++++++++++++++
The schedule for the weekend is all set;
Saturday, June 26th:
10AM Uruguay v. South Korea
2:30PM USA v. Ghana
Sunday, June 27th:
10AM Germany v. England
2:30PM Argentina v. Mexico
We’ll have Monday June 28th and Tuesday June 29th all figured out by tomorrow afternoon.
Although the excitement mounts between now and the July 11th final, there will be far fewer games to play (so fans can keep up with the tournament AND perhaps get something else done).
There are TWO REST DAYS (for you, me and the players) on June 30th and July 1st.
There are TWO GAMES on both July 2nd and July 3rd (the quarter-finals).
There are TWO MORE REST DAYS July 4th and 5th.
There is ONE GAME on both July 6 and 7th—the semi-finals.
There are TWO MORE REST DAYS July 8th and 9th (I usually experience withdrawal at this point in the tournament, compounded by the fact that all the work I have neglected since June 11th will pester.)
There is one game on Saturday, July 10th—for third place.
The Final is July 11th!
Then it is back to work, or for me, on to Istanbul.
In the event that Portugal leads group G, the tournament’s heavy-hitters (Brazil, Germany, Spain and Argentina) could end up playing/eliminating each other on the way to the final. The team that emerges from a Spanish/Brazilian/German/Argentina battle would probably be pretty wiped out by the time it came up against The Netherlands on July 11th. Hup Holland!
Here’s the schedule and permutations for the last day of Group play on Friday, June 25th:
10AM
Brazil v. Portugal
North Korea v. Ivory Coast
2:30PM
Spain v. Chile
Switzerland v. Honduras
I’d recommend the first game listed given the scenarios:
GROUP G
Brazil has advanced. Wins group with: (A) Win or tie versus Portugal
Portugal advances with: (A) Win or tie versus Brazil (B) Loss IF Ivory Coast does not win AND make up goal difference
Ivory Coast advances with: (A) Win versus North Korea AND Portugal loss AND make up goal difference
North Korea has been eliminated.
GROUP H
Chile advances with: (A) Win or tie versus Spain (also wins group) (B) Loss and Switzerland tie or loss (C) Loss and Switzerland win and maintain tiebreakers over Switzerland
Spain advances with: (A) Win versus Chile (B) Tie and Switzerland tie or loss (C) Loss and Honduras win and maintain tiebreakers over Switzerland and Honduras
Switzerland advances with: (A) Win and Spain tie or loss (B) Win and Spain win and make up tiebreakers on Chile (C) Tie and Spain loss (D) Loss and Spain loss and hold tiebreakers over Spain and Honduras
Honduras advances with: (A) Win and Chile win and make up tiebreakers on Spain and Switzerland
++++++++++++++
The schedule for the weekend is all set;
Saturday, June 26th:
10AM Uruguay v. South Korea
2:30PM USA v. Ghana
Sunday, June 27th:
10AM Germany v. England
2:30PM Argentina v. Mexico
We’ll have Monday June 28th and Tuesday June 29th all figured out by tomorrow afternoon.
Although the excitement mounts between now and the July 11th final, there will be far fewer games to play (so fans can keep up with the tournament AND perhaps get something else done).
There are TWO REST DAYS (for you, me and the players) on June 30th and July 1st.
There are TWO GAMES on both July 2nd and July 3rd (the quarter-finals).
There are TWO MORE REST DAYS July 4th and 5th.
There is ONE GAME on both July 6 and 7th—the semi-finals.
There are TWO MORE REST DAYS July 8th and 9th (I usually experience withdrawal at this point in the tournament, compounded by the fact that all the work I have neglected since June 11th will pester.)
There is one game on Saturday, July 10th—for third place.
The Final is July 11th!
Then it is back to work, or for me, on to Istanbul.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
les snobs
From "World of Sport" a blog on eurosport.com--Thanks!
World Cup Gallery: Les Miserables
"France coach Raymond Domenech clearly thought to himself, 'what could I possibly do to give the world a lower regard for me and my team?' - the solution was to snub his opposite number's offered handshake. What overwhelming class!"
World Cup Gallery: Les Miserables
"France coach Raymond Domenech clearly thought to himself, 'what could I possibly do to give the world a lower regard for me and my team?' - the solution was to snub his opposite number's offered handshake. What overwhelming class!"
The Accidental Patriot
I really had my heart set on Slovenia and Algeria spanking the super-powers. Shucks.
But I'm compelled to confess that I cheered for the USA today (at least in the second half). I left the house this morning for the first time to watch a game in a public venue. (The Globe in downtown Athens is a terrific place generally and a superb World Cup viewing venue--thanks Randy and Terry). It felt creepy when the 150-ish persons started chanting "U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!" after the whoops and hollers that followed the goal, but I was happy that the team had won. Both sides played really well.
The 'Armchair Pundit' at eruosport.yahoo.com has the best (funniest) report on the significance of the events in Group C today. The USA's dramatic goal in the 91st minutes shoved England into 2nd place, and up against Germany (Group D 1st place) on Sunday. England's path only gets worse;
"Just how tough is it for England? Well, it couldn't be any tougher. If they manage to make it past Germany, they will most likely face Argentina in the quarter-finals. Then Spain. Then Brazil......
"It's the team that always beats us, followed by the best team in the competition, followed by the pre-tournament favourites, followed by the country that has won more World Cups than anyone else. Nice.
".....In fact, no team has ever won the World Cup after negotiating such an arduous fixture list.
"We might beat Germany. We might even beat Germany and Argentina. But we're highly unlikely to beat Germany and Argentina and Spain. And we'll never beat Germany and Argentina and Spain and Brazil. It's just too hard.....
England were knocked out of the World Cup this afternoon."
- - -
*************************
The Schedule for Thursday:
As far as I can tell Group 'F' plays at 10 AM and 'E' at 2:30PM, ET.
ITA v. SVK (Italy and Slovakia)
PAR v. NZL (Paraguay and New Zealand)
and then:
DEN v. JPN (Denmark and Japan)
CMR v. NED (Cameroon and The Netherlands)
Notice that group 'F' is wide-open, but the only real thing to be decided in Group E is whether Denmark or Japan advance.
The Permutations (from espn.com)
GROUP E
Netherlands has advanced. Netherlands wins the group with:
(a) Win or a tie versus Cameroon
(b) Loss AND a Denmark-Japan tie
(c) Loss IF the Denmark-Japan winner does not make up tiebreakers
Japan advances with:
(a) Win or tie versus Denmark
Japan wins group with:
(a) Win AND a Netherlands loss AND by making up tiebreakers on Netherlands
Denmark advances with:
(a) Win versus Japan
Denmark wins group with:
(a) Win AND a Netherlands loss AND by making up tiebreakers on Netherlands
Cameroon has been eliminated.
GROUP F
Paraguay advances with:
(a) Win/tie versus New Zealand
(b) Loss AND Italy tie verus Slovakia
(c) Loss and Slovakia win as long as Slovakia doesn't make up tiebreakers
Italy advances with:
(a) Win versus Slovakia
(b) Tie and New Zealand loss
(c) Tie AND Paraguay-New Zealand tie IF Italy outscores New Zealand
New Zealand advances with:
(a) Win versus Paraguay
(b) Tie AND Italy-Slovakia tie IF New Zealand outscores Italy
Slovakia advances with:
(a) Win versus Italy AND Paraguay win/tie versus New Zealand
(b) Win versus Italy AND Paraguay loss versus New Zealand AND make up tiebreakers versus Paraguay
But I'm compelled to confess that I cheered for the USA today (at least in the second half). I left the house this morning for the first time to watch a game in a public venue. (The Globe in downtown Athens is a terrific place generally and a superb World Cup viewing venue--thanks Randy and Terry). It felt creepy when the 150-ish persons started chanting "U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!" after the whoops and hollers that followed the goal, but I was happy that the team had won. Both sides played really well.
The 'Armchair Pundit' at eruosport.yahoo.com has the best (funniest) report on the significance of the events in Group C today. The USA's dramatic goal in the 91st minutes shoved England into 2nd place, and up against Germany (Group D 1st place) on Sunday. England's path only gets worse;
"Just how tough is it for England? Well, it couldn't be any tougher. If they manage to make it past Germany, they will most likely face Argentina in the quarter-finals. Then Spain. Then Brazil......
"It's the team that always beats us, followed by the best team in the competition, followed by the pre-tournament favourites, followed by the country that has won more World Cups than anyone else. Nice.
".....In fact, no team has ever won the World Cup after negotiating such an arduous fixture list.
"We might beat Germany. We might even beat Germany and Argentina. But we're highly unlikely to beat Germany and Argentina and Spain. And we'll never beat Germany and Argentina and Spain and Brazil. It's just too hard.....
England were knocked out of the World Cup this afternoon."
- - -
*************************
The Schedule for Thursday:
As far as I can tell Group 'F' plays at 10 AM and 'E' at 2:30PM, ET.
ITA v. SVK (Italy and Slovakia)
PAR v. NZL (Paraguay and New Zealand)
and then:
DEN v. JPN (Denmark and Japan)
CMR v. NED (Cameroon and The Netherlands)
Notice that group 'F' is wide-open, but the only real thing to be decided in Group E is whether Denmark or Japan advance.
The Permutations (from espn.com)
GROUP E
Netherlands has advanced. Netherlands wins the group with:
(a) Win or a tie versus Cameroon
(b) Loss AND a Denmark-Japan tie
(c) Loss IF the Denmark-Japan winner does not make up tiebreakers
Japan advances with:
(a) Win or tie versus Denmark
Japan wins group with:
(a) Win AND a Netherlands loss AND by making up tiebreakers on Netherlands
Denmark advances with:
(a) Win versus Japan
Denmark wins group with:
(a) Win AND a Netherlands loss AND by making up tiebreakers on Netherlands
Cameroon has been eliminated.
GROUP F
Paraguay advances with:
(a) Win/tie versus New Zealand
(b) Loss AND Italy tie verus Slovakia
(c) Loss and Slovakia win as long as Slovakia doesn't make up tiebreakers
Italy advances with:
(a) Win versus Slovakia
(b) Tie and New Zealand loss
(c) Tie AND Paraguay-New Zealand tie IF Italy outscores New Zealand
New Zealand advances with:
(a) Win versus Paraguay
(b) Tie AND Italy-Slovakia tie IF New Zealand outscores Italy
Slovakia advances with:
(a) Win versus Italy AND Paraguay win/tie versus New Zealand
(b) Win versus Italy AND Paraguay loss versus New Zealand AND make up tiebreakers versus Paraguay
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
France goes home, RSA stays home
How much money has the South African government invested in stadiums instead of streetlights? What do victories and defeats on the pitch mean in the context of dramatic poverty and social inequities in the populous?
Abundant sympathies have been expressed today for South Africa, whose team, despite a spirited victory over the dysfunctional French team, failed to qualify for the Round of 16 (Mexico edged out RSA through its superior goals differential for the second spot in the group behind Uruguay).
I suspect that most South Africans want more to come from the World Cup than balls bouncing against the back of the net. South Africa ranks 129th (out of 182 countries) on the United Nations’ Human Development Report. If you feel sorry for the team’s losses in football, consider that life expectancy in South Africa is 51.5 years. And that 42.9% of the population lives on less than US$2.00 a day. And that 8 million people lack potable water.
Granted, national spirit (at least as seen from afar on ESPN) appears profound as the country hosts this largest-of-all-global-events and cheers its team in particular. But we should be careful before accepting that stadiums are a sign of progress, given the lack of investment in basic infrastructure and human welfare.
It’s especially ironic that it is the post-apartheid, African National Congress (ANC) government that has spent billions on this global sporting spectacle while basic needs go unmet.
The ANC dates back to the early 20th century. It began as a moderate movement seeking equal rights, but following WW2 and the institution of apartheid by the (white) National Party in 1948, the struggle transformed into an armed resistance.
Resistance intensified, but so did the repression. As discussed in an earlier post on Youth Day, the June 16th national holiday that commemorates the 1976 massacre of school children at Soweto, South Africa experienced intense violence throughout the 1970s and 1980s.
In the course of my stay (1997) in post-apartheid South Africa, people told me that in the 1980s the violence in the townships was so intense that many South Africans believed that the government would fall at anytime and the country would go up in flames. For many South Africans, the stalemate between the repressive security forces and resistance appeared to be a war without end.
Remarkably, the ANC and the apartheid government negotiated a political transition to a multiracial electoral democracy. In 1990, ANC leader Nelson Mandela was freed from prison (after 27 years); Mandela went on to win the presidency four years later in South Africa’s first elections in which Black South Africans could vote.
The South African ‘miracle’ of affecting political transition through negotiations rather than persisting with the violent conflict has made South Africa a model in conflict resolution. (Israel should pay attention to the lessons from RSA on ending apartheid and its associated violence). But the fact that the ANC negotiated a settlement rather than winning the war meant that many compromises were made.
Although the ANC won the elections in 1994, they had lost the revolution. The ANC gained control of the government, but wealth and power remained in the hands of the white minority. There were tremendous expectations following the end of aparthied: for potable water, indoor plumbing, electricity, paved roads, school teachers, health clinics. Meeting these expectations has been difficult for each successive ANC government. More South Africans live in substandard housing in shantytowns now than under apartheid.
Perhaps it is easier to provide spectacular pageantry and a splashy month-long party than the long term investments needed in the social sector.
Abundant sympathies have been expressed today for South Africa, whose team, despite a spirited victory over the dysfunctional French team, failed to qualify for the Round of 16 (Mexico edged out RSA through its superior goals differential for the second spot in the group behind Uruguay).
I suspect that most South Africans want more to come from the World Cup than balls bouncing against the back of the net. South Africa ranks 129th (out of 182 countries) on the United Nations’ Human Development Report. If you feel sorry for the team’s losses in football, consider that life expectancy in South Africa is 51.5 years. And that 42.9% of the population lives on less than US$2.00 a day. And that 8 million people lack potable water.
Granted, national spirit (at least as seen from afar on ESPN) appears profound as the country hosts this largest-of-all-global-events and cheers its team in particular. But we should be careful before accepting that stadiums are a sign of progress, given the lack of investment in basic infrastructure and human welfare.
It’s especially ironic that it is the post-apartheid, African National Congress (ANC) government that has spent billions on this global sporting spectacle while basic needs go unmet.
The ANC dates back to the early 20th century. It began as a moderate movement seeking equal rights, but following WW2 and the institution of apartheid by the (white) National Party in 1948, the struggle transformed into an armed resistance.
Resistance intensified, but so did the repression. As discussed in an earlier post on Youth Day, the June 16th national holiday that commemorates the 1976 massacre of school children at Soweto, South Africa experienced intense violence throughout the 1970s and 1980s.
In the course of my stay (1997) in post-apartheid South Africa, people told me that in the 1980s the violence in the townships was so intense that many South Africans believed that the government would fall at anytime and the country would go up in flames. For many South Africans, the stalemate between the repressive security forces and resistance appeared to be a war without end.
Remarkably, the ANC and the apartheid government negotiated a political transition to a multiracial electoral democracy. In 1990, ANC leader Nelson Mandela was freed from prison (after 27 years); Mandela went on to win the presidency four years later in South Africa’s first elections in which Black South Africans could vote.
The South African ‘miracle’ of affecting political transition through negotiations rather than persisting with the violent conflict has made South Africa a model in conflict resolution. (Israel should pay attention to the lessons from RSA on ending apartheid and its associated violence). But the fact that the ANC negotiated a settlement rather than winning the war meant that many compromises were made.
Although the ANC won the elections in 1994, they had lost the revolution. The ANC gained control of the government, but wealth and power remained in the hands of the white minority. There were tremendous expectations following the end of aparthied: for potable water, indoor plumbing, electricity, paved roads, school teachers, health clinics. Meeting these expectations has been difficult for each successive ANC government. More South Africans live in substandard housing in shantytowns now than under apartheid.
Perhaps it is easier to provide spectacular pageantry and a splashy month-long party than the long term investments needed in the social sector.
Monday, June 21, 2010
Schedule and Scenarios
If the French team's mutiny grows into a full-on work-stoppage (in the great tradition of the French public sector strike), RSA could very well be the winners. The host team needs to beat France, and beat them good to make up for a -2 goal deficit. The leaks from the French locker-room suggest serious discord, and raise the exciting possibility of a RSA upset and advancement into the second round. French players, stand up for your labor rights---workers of the world unite! And go RSA!
Entering this third and final stage of group play (June 22-June 25), fully 30 of the 32 teams have a shot at advancing. Granted, some of the teams, such as South Africa and Honduras, have a decidedly 'long' shot at advancing, but it is still theoretically possible. Only Cameroon and North Korea have been eliminated (although they still play their third and final matches). Brazil and The Netherlands will advance, but whether as the top or second in the group is to be determined.
The schedule changes this week. Instead of three games (shown on Eastern Time at 7:30AM, 10AM, and 2:30PM), there will be four games for four days. The bummer is that games will be shown simultaneously (two at 10:00AM and two at 2:30PM) so that one has to choose.
So on Tuesday, June 22nd, the schedule is:
10AM, Group A:
FRA v. RSA
MEX v. URU
2:30PM, Group B:
ARG v. GRE
NIG v. KOR
Groups play the third (final) game at the same time, as the outcome of one game might have an impact on the other.
Lots of excitement in the next few days, including:
*Will Mexico and Uruguay play for a tie so they can both advance?
*Will Nigeria rally and knock out South Korea with sufficient goals to advance (with a little help from Argentina?)
And (my favorite)
*Will the US/English rivalry be settled by a coin toss?
For the detail oriented reader, the below discussion of EVERY groups' complete possible scenarios has been cut-n-pasted from ESPN.com:
GROUP A
Uruguay advances with:
(a) Wins group with win or tie versus Mexico
(b) Loss and France-South Africa tie
(c) Loss and winner of France-South Africa does not make up tiebreakers
Mexico advances with:
(a) Win group with win versus Uruguay
(b) Tie versus Uruguay
(c) Loss and France-South Africa tie
(d) Loss and winner of France-South Africa doesn't make up tiebreaker
France/South Africa advance with:
(a) Win and and make up tiebreaker on loser of Mexico-Uruguay
(b) Both are out with a tie or a Mexico-Uruguay tie
GROUP B
Argentina advances with:
(a) Win or tie versus Greece
(b) South Korea tie/loss versus Nigeria
(c) Loss as long as both South Korea and Greece do not make up tiebreakers
South Korea advances with:
(a) Win versus Nigeria and Greece does not either (1) win by greater margin, or (2) win by same margin and score 2+ more goals
(b) Tie and Greece tie/loss
Greece advances with:
(a) Win versus Argentina and South Korea tie/loss
(b) Win by greater margin than South Korea
(c) Win by same margin as South Korea and score 2+ more goals
(d) Tie and South Korea loss
(e) Win by 3+ goals
Nigeria advances with:
(a) Win versus South Korea and Argentina win
GROUP C
USA advances with:
(a) Win versus Algeria on Wednesday
(b) Tie and Slovenia-England tie IF England does not outscore USA by 2+ goals
(c) Tie and England loss
Slovenia advances with:
(a) Win or tie versus England
(b) Loss AND USA tie vs Algeria
(c) Loss and Algeria win as long as Algeria doesn't make up tiebreakers*
England advances with:
(a) Win versus Slovenia
(b) Tie AND USA-Algeria tie AND outscore USA by 3 goals
Algeria advances with:
(a) Win versus USA AND Slovenia win/tie versus England
(b) Win versus USA AND Slovenia loss versus England AND makes up tiebreakers on Slovenia
*Note: If the U.S. draws with Algeria and England draws with Slovenia, and England scores exactly two more goals than the U.S., the U.S. and England would be even on all tiebreakers for second place. The tie would be broken by drawing lots ... aka, a coin flip.
GROUP D
The simplest scenarios are that Ghana, Germany and Serbia all advance with a win. Australia must win and get help.
Ghana advances with:
(a) Win or tie versus Germany
(b) Loss and Australia-Serbia tie IF Serbia does not make up tiebreakers
(c) Loss and Australia win IF Australia does not make up tiebreakers (Australia is way behind on goal differential)
Germany advances with:
(a) Win versus Ghana
(b) Tie and Serbia-Australia tie IF Serbia does not make up tiebreakers
(c) Tie and Australia win IF Australia does not make up tiebreakers
Serbia advances with:
(a) Win versus Australia
(b) Tie and Ghana win
(c) Tie and Ghana-Germany tie AND make up tiebreakers on Germany
Australia advances with:
(a) Win versus Serbia and Ghana win
(b) Win and Germany win and make up tiebreakers on Ghana
(c) Win and Ghana-Germany tie and make up tiebreakers on Germany (not likely)
GROUP E
Netherlands has advanced. Netherlands wins the group with:
(a) Win or a tie versus Cameroon
(b) Loss AND a Denmark-Japan tie
(c) Loss IF the Denmark-Japan winner does not make up tiebreakers
Japan advances with:
(a) Win or tie versus Denmark
Japan wins group with:
(a) Win AND a Netherlands loss AND by making up tiebreakers on Netherlands
Denmark advances with:
(a) Win versus Japan
Denmark wins group with:
(a) Win AND a Netherlands loss AND by making up tiebreakers on Netherlands
Cameroon has been eliminated.
GROUP F
Paraguay advances with:
(a) Win/tie versus New Zealand
(b) Loss AND Italy tie verus Slovakia
(c) Loss and Slovakia win as long as Slovakia doesn't make up tiebreakers
Italy advances with:
(a) Win versus Slovakia
(b) Tie and New Zealand loss
(c) Tie AND Paraguay-New Zealand tie IF Italy outscores New Zealand
New Zealand advances with:
(a) Win versus Paraguay
(b) Tie AND Italy-Slovakia tie IF New Zealand outscores Italy
Slovakia advances with:
(a) Win versus Italy AND Paraguay win/tie versus New Zealand
(b) Win versus Italy AND Paraguay loss versus New Zealand AND make up tiebreakers versus Paraguay
GROUP G
Brazil has advanced. Wins group with:
(a) Win or tie versus Portugal
Portugal advances with:
(a) Win or tie versus Brazil
(b) Loss IF Ivory Coast does not win AND make up goal difference
Ivory Coast advances with:
(a) Win versus North Korea AND Portugal loss AND make up goal difference
North Korea has been eliminated.
GROUP H
Chile advances with:
(a) Win or tie versus Spain (also wins group)
(b) Loss and Switzerland tie or loss
(c) Loss and Switzerland win and maintain tiebreakers over Switzerland
Spain advances with:
(a) Win versus Chile
(b) Tie and Switzerland tie or loss
(c) Loss and Honduras win and maintain tiebreakers over Switzerland and Honduras
Switzerland advances with:
(a) Win and Spain tie or loss
(b) Win and Spain win and make up tiebreakers on Chile
(c) Tie and Spain loss
(d) Loss and Spain loss and hold tiebreakers over Spain and Honduras
Honduras advances with:
(a) Win and Chile win and make up tiebreakers on Spain and Switzerland
Entering this third and final stage of group play (June 22-June 25), fully 30 of the 32 teams have a shot at advancing. Granted, some of the teams, such as South Africa and Honduras, have a decidedly 'long' shot at advancing, but it is still theoretically possible. Only Cameroon and North Korea have been eliminated (although they still play their third and final matches). Brazil and The Netherlands will advance, but whether as the top or second in the group is to be determined.
The schedule changes this week. Instead of three games (shown on Eastern Time at 7:30AM, 10AM, and 2:30PM), there will be four games for four days. The bummer is that games will be shown simultaneously (two at 10:00AM and two at 2:30PM) so that one has to choose.
So on Tuesday, June 22nd, the schedule is:
10AM, Group A:
FRA v. RSA
MEX v. URU
2:30PM, Group B:
ARG v. GRE
NIG v. KOR
Groups play the third (final) game at the same time, as the outcome of one game might have an impact on the other.
Lots of excitement in the next few days, including:
*Will Mexico and Uruguay play for a tie so they can both advance?
*Will Nigeria rally and knock out South Korea with sufficient goals to advance (with a little help from Argentina?)
And (my favorite)
*Will the US/English rivalry be settled by a coin toss?
For the detail oriented reader, the below discussion of EVERY groups' complete possible scenarios has been cut-n-pasted from ESPN.com:
GROUP A
Uruguay advances with:
(a) Wins group with win or tie versus Mexico
(b) Loss and France-South Africa tie
(c) Loss and winner of France-South Africa does not make up tiebreakers
Mexico advances with:
(a) Win group with win versus Uruguay
(b) Tie versus Uruguay
(c) Loss and France-South Africa tie
(d) Loss and winner of France-South Africa doesn't make up tiebreaker
France/South Africa advance with:
(a) Win and and make up tiebreaker on loser of Mexico-Uruguay
(b) Both are out with a tie or a Mexico-Uruguay tie
GROUP B
Argentina advances with:
(a) Win or tie versus Greece
(b) South Korea tie/loss versus Nigeria
(c) Loss as long as both South Korea and Greece do not make up tiebreakers
South Korea advances with:
(a) Win versus Nigeria and Greece does not either (1) win by greater margin, or (2) win by same margin and score 2+ more goals
(b) Tie and Greece tie/loss
Greece advances with:
(a) Win versus Argentina and South Korea tie/loss
(b) Win by greater margin than South Korea
(c) Win by same margin as South Korea and score 2+ more goals
(d) Tie and South Korea loss
(e) Win by 3+ goals
Nigeria advances with:
(a) Win versus South Korea and Argentina win
GROUP C
USA advances with:
(a) Win versus Algeria on Wednesday
(b) Tie and Slovenia-England tie IF England does not outscore USA by 2+ goals
(c) Tie and England loss
Slovenia advances with:
(a) Win or tie versus England
(b) Loss AND USA tie vs Algeria
(c) Loss and Algeria win as long as Algeria doesn't make up tiebreakers*
England advances with:
(a) Win versus Slovenia
(b) Tie AND USA-Algeria tie AND outscore USA by 3 goals
Algeria advances with:
(a) Win versus USA AND Slovenia win/tie versus England
(b) Win versus USA AND Slovenia loss versus England AND makes up tiebreakers on Slovenia
*Note: If the U.S. draws with Algeria and England draws with Slovenia, and England scores exactly two more goals than the U.S., the U.S. and England would be even on all tiebreakers for second place. The tie would be broken by drawing lots ... aka, a coin flip.
GROUP D
The simplest scenarios are that Ghana, Germany and Serbia all advance with a win. Australia must win and get help.
Ghana advances with:
(a) Win or tie versus Germany
(b) Loss and Australia-Serbia tie IF Serbia does not make up tiebreakers
(c) Loss and Australia win IF Australia does not make up tiebreakers (Australia is way behind on goal differential)
Germany advances with:
(a) Win versus Ghana
(b) Tie and Serbia-Australia tie IF Serbia does not make up tiebreakers
(c) Tie and Australia win IF Australia does not make up tiebreakers
Serbia advances with:
(a) Win versus Australia
(b) Tie and Ghana win
(c) Tie and Ghana-Germany tie AND make up tiebreakers on Germany
Australia advances with:
(a) Win versus Serbia and Ghana win
(b) Win and Germany win and make up tiebreakers on Ghana
(c) Win and Ghana-Germany tie and make up tiebreakers on Germany (not likely)
GROUP E
Netherlands has advanced. Netherlands wins the group with:
(a) Win or a tie versus Cameroon
(b) Loss AND a Denmark-Japan tie
(c) Loss IF the Denmark-Japan winner does not make up tiebreakers
Japan advances with:
(a) Win or tie versus Denmark
Japan wins group with:
(a) Win AND a Netherlands loss AND by making up tiebreakers on Netherlands
Denmark advances with:
(a) Win versus Japan
Denmark wins group with:
(a) Win AND a Netherlands loss AND by making up tiebreakers on Netherlands
Cameroon has been eliminated.
GROUP F
Paraguay advances with:
(a) Win/tie versus New Zealand
(b) Loss AND Italy tie verus Slovakia
(c) Loss and Slovakia win as long as Slovakia doesn't make up tiebreakers
Italy advances with:
(a) Win versus Slovakia
(b) Tie and New Zealand loss
(c) Tie AND Paraguay-New Zealand tie IF Italy outscores New Zealand
New Zealand advances with:
(a) Win versus Paraguay
(b) Tie AND Italy-Slovakia tie IF New Zealand outscores Italy
Slovakia advances with:
(a) Win versus Italy AND Paraguay win/tie versus New Zealand
(b) Win versus Italy AND Paraguay loss versus New Zealand AND make up tiebreakers versus Paraguay
GROUP G
Brazil has advanced. Wins group with:
(a) Win or tie versus Portugal
Portugal advances with:
(a) Win or tie versus Brazil
(b) Loss IF Ivory Coast does not win AND make up goal difference
Ivory Coast advances with:
(a) Win versus North Korea AND Portugal loss AND make up goal difference
North Korea has been eliminated.
GROUP H
Chile advances with:
(a) Win or tie versus Spain (also wins group)
(b) Loss and Switzerland tie or loss
(c) Loss and Switzerland win and maintain tiebreakers over Switzerland
Spain advances with:
(a) Win versus Chile
(b) Tie and Switzerland tie or loss
(c) Loss and Honduras win and maintain tiebreakers over Switzerland and Honduras
Switzerland advances with:
(a) Win and Spain tie or loss
(b) Win and Spain win and make up tiebreakers on Chile
(c) Tie and Spain loss
(d) Loss and Spain loss and hold tiebreakers over Spain and Honduras
Honduras advances with:
(a) Win and Chile win and make up tiebreakers on Spain and Switzerland
Sunday, June 20, 2010
Stop Your Crying
The Troubles of the Titans dominates the headlines. The English whinging, the French drama, and the US’s indignant cries of victimization are drowning out the blare of the vuvuzelas.
The coverage of the World Cup this weekend has focused on teams, fans and pundits complaining. British fans, already dispirited by their weather, their island and a general post-empire malaise, are now dealing with double-draws and poor performances (read: ‘might as well be losing’). France tied Uruguay and then had the nerve to lose to Mexico, 0-2. French player Nicolas Anelka was sent home after reportedly telling his coach to “Go f$%^ yourself, dirty son of a whore!’ and then refusing to apologize. The insolence has been rumored to be a sign of a more massive mutiny between the team and the coach.
But US complainers take the prize for most annoying. (My crankiness is probably my own fault for watching six hours of ESPN every day for ten days.) While US team members themselves have been more careful in their comments, the US public/media is on fire with complaints, recriminations, and pathetic whimpers of ‘it’s not FAIR!’
Suddenly the US public is passionately involved in the global sports event it couldn’t care less about last week. Overnight, US couch potatoes and sports commentators are suddenly experts in ‘soccer.’ The same US commentators who last week were voicing their distance and indifference are now insisting that their own judgment is superior to that of the referee ---who has years of experience, indeed is so highly qualified that he was selected to officiate the African Nations Cup in Angola in January 2010.
Why would that be? What accounts for the sense of superiority? What blend of ignorance and arrogance produces American Exceptionalism?
I liked this comment by a Slovenian, responding to US complainers:
“First of all, I think in general Slovenians don’t have big issues against you…in general at least. After the game everyone is full of emotions, and they say things, that may not really be appropriate. But everyone seems to underestimate us and think of us as a third world country… which is not true. Check out what Wikipedia says on Slovenia, after that, you can judge us if you want. BTW, you are welcome to visit us, if you are planning to visit Europe.
“….Every media on the net, that I’ve visited, were reporting about that third goal and how the US was muged (sic). But I guess no one remembers that match against England anymore. You should LOST that game, but you can say thanks to Robert Green, that you tied that match. Also Slovenia should play tie against Algeria, because our goal was also given with the help of the goalkeeper….
“But guess what—it ain’t so. This is sport and such things happen. That’s why soccer is so popular in the world…because it’s so unpredictable and everything can happen to any team.”
Note also that Spain and Germany have expressed disappointment at their respective loses without resorting to bigoted racist remarks about being cheated out of their god-given right to dominate. Maybe that’s because I’m not reading the German press, and Switzerland’s triumph over Spain failed to inspire the entitled bigots.
By Monday PM we will know what’s at stake for each team in the final phase of group play, June 22-June 25th. Stay tuned!
The coverage of the World Cup this weekend has focused on teams, fans and pundits complaining. British fans, already dispirited by their weather, their island and a general post-empire malaise, are now dealing with double-draws and poor performances (read: ‘might as well be losing’). France tied Uruguay and then had the nerve to lose to Mexico, 0-2. French player Nicolas Anelka was sent home after reportedly telling his coach to “Go f$%^ yourself, dirty son of a whore!’ and then refusing to apologize. The insolence has been rumored to be a sign of a more massive mutiny between the team and the coach.
But US complainers take the prize for most annoying. (My crankiness is probably my own fault for watching six hours of ESPN every day for ten days.) While US team members themselves have been more careful in their comments, the US public/media is on fire with complaints, recriminations, and pathetic whimpers of ‘it’s not FAIR!’
Suddenly the US public is passionately involved in the global sports event it couldn’t care less about last week. Overnight, US couch potatoes and sports commentators are suddenly experts in ‘soccer.’ The same US commentators who last week were voicing their distance and indifference are now insisting that their own judgment is superior to that of the referee ---who has years of experience, indeed is so highly qualified that he was selected to officiate the African Nations Cup in Angola in January 2010.
Why would that be? What accounts for the sense of superiority? What blend of ignorance and arrogance produces American Exceptionalism?
I liked this comment by a Slovenian, responding to US complainers:
“First of all, I think in general Slovenians don’t have big issues against you…in general at least. After the game everyone is full of emotions, and they say things, that may not really be appropriate. But everyone seems to underestimate us and think of us as a third world country… which is not true. Check out what Wikipedia says on Slovenia, after that, you can judge us if you want. BTW, you are welcome to visit us, if you are planning to visit Europe.
“….Every media on the net, that I’ve visited, were reporting about that third goal and how the US was muged (sic). But I guess no one remembers that match against England anymore. You should LOST that game, but you can say thanks to Robert Green, that you tied that match. Also Slovenia should play tie against Algeria, because our goal was also given with the help of the goalkeeper….
“But guess what—it ain’t so. This is sport and such things happen. That’s why soccer is so popular in the world…because it’s so unpredictable and everything can happen to any team.”
Note also that Spain and Germany have expressed disappointment at their respective loses without resorting to bigoted racist remarks about being cheated out of their god-given right to dominate. Maybe that’s because I’m not reading the German press, and Switzerland’s triumph over Spain failed to inspire the entitled bigots.
By Monday PM we will know what’s at stake for each team in the final phase of group play, June 22-June 25th. Stay tuned!
Saturday, June 19, 2010
Closed minds in a wide-open tournament
What to make of the image of Japanese players that are blonder than the Dutch? Globalization has disrupted categories of race and place. The World Cup is a theatre of transformative geographies, where national identities are preformed in concert with global capitalism.
While our geographic imaginations are limited, on the pitch everything is wide open. As far as I can tell, with half of the teams having finished the second phase of group play, all the teams have a theoretical shot of qualifying for the next round, the Round of 16. Some of the teams have only a ‘long shot’---such as RSA (for South Africa to advance they would have to beat France by multiple goals, and Mexico would have to beat Uruguay. Could happen). Argentina and The Netherlands will go through to the Round of 16, although in the top or second spot in the group is to be determined on June 23rd.
Much of the discussion concerning Friday’s fall of the favorites (Germany, US and England all under-performed) was centered on gripping about the referee in the US/Slovenia match. Sadly, certain critics seemed to imply that Koman Coulibaly’s nationality (Malian) and even worse the continent on which he was born (Africa) seemed to have something to do with his alleged competence. How can a continent have anything to do with an individual’s competence? Do the sand and the soil impart qualities on one’s judgment, more than training and experience? Why am I watching ESPN anyway?
Other critics focused on how the poor USA was robbed of its rightful victory. Both of these narratives ---the incompetent African and the presumptive greatness of the USA---are two sides of the same coin, or both aspects of the same ideologies.
Personally I found the referee in the first match (Germany/Serbia) more questionable. Spanish referee Alberto Undiano handed out nine yellow cards, and ejected one of the German players (second yellow card = red), leaving Germany playing short for two-thirds of the game.
Stop whining US and act like professions! As for the commentators, watch your tongues when you resort to geographical essentialisms and racism to make your point.
While our geographic imaginations are limited, on the pitch everything is wide open. As far as I can tell, with half of the teams having finished the second phase of group play, all the teams have a theoretical shot of qualifying for the next round, the Round of 16. Some of the teams have only a ‘long shot’---such as RSA (for South Africa to advance they would have to beat France by multiple goals, and Mexico would have to beat Uruguay. Could happen). Argentina and The Netherlands will go through to the Round of 16, although in the top or second spot in the group is to be determined on June 23rd.
Much of the discussion concerning Friday’s fall of the favorites (Germany, US and England all under-performed) was centered on gripping about the referee in the US/Slovenia match. Sadly, certain critics seemed to imply that Koman Coulibaly’s nationality (Malian) and even worse the continent on which he was born (Africa) seemed to have something to do with his alleged competence. How can a continent have anything to do with an individual’s competence? Do the sand and the soil impart qualities on one’s judgment, more than training and experience? Why am I watching ESPN anyway?
Other critics focused on how the poor USA was robbed of its rightful victory. Both of these narratives ---the incompetent African and the presumptive greatness of the USA---are two sides of the same coin, or both aspects of the same ideologies.
Personally I found the referee in the first match (Germany/Serbia) more questionable. Spanish referee Alberto Undiano handed out nine yellow cards, and ejected one of the German players (second yellow card = red), leaving Germany playing short for two-thirds of the game.
Stop whining US and act like professions! As for the commentators, watch your tongues when you resort to geographical essentialisms and racism to make your point.
Friday, June 18, 2010
Upsets and Permutations
The Titans struggled and stumbled while the Underdogs triumphed in Friday's eighth day of group play. Germany LOST, and the US and England each tied with teams of lesser rank (at least according to Fifa). Serbia WON, and Slovenia and Algeria did better than expected (again, at least according to Fifa's ranks and the global media). In short, although Groups A, B and C have concluded the second phase of group play, the tournament is still wide-open.
Indeed, the situation is so close in all three groups that the final result might come down to something called 'goal difference' or (shudder) the 'drawing of lots by the Fifa Organizing Committee' ---!!!
Remember, the top two teams from each of the eight groups advance into the Round of 16 (which starts Saturday June 26). The teams are ranked within the group as follows (skip this if you will be annoyed by how confusing it all is):
From Fifa's website:
"According to the Regulations of the 2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa™, the ranking of each team in each group will be determined as follows:
a) greatest number of points obtained in all group matches;
b) goal difference in all group matches;
c) greatest number of goals scored in all group matches.
If two or more teams are equal on the basis of the above three criteria, their rankings will be determined as follows:
d) greatest number of points obtained in the group matches between the teams concerned;
e) goal difference resulting from the group matches between the teams concerned;
f) greater number of goals scored in all group matches between the teams concerned;
g) drawing of lots by the FIFA Organising Committee."
All three groups are up for grabs! Cool.
Indeed, the situation is so close in all three groups that the final result might come down to something called 'goal difference' or (shudder) the 'drawing of lots by the Fifa Organizing Committee' ---!!!
Remember, the top two teams from each of the eight groups advance into the Round of 16 (which starts Saturday June 26). The teams are ranked within the group as follows (skip this if you will be annoyed by how confusing it all is):
From Fifa's website:
"According to the Regulations of the 2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa™, the ranking of each team in each group will be determined as follows:
a) greatest number of points obtained in all group matches;
b) goal difference in all group matches;
c) greatest number of goals scored in all group matches.
If two or more teams are equal on the basis of the above three criteria, their rankings will be determined as follows:
d) greatest number of points obtained in the group matches between the teams concerned;
e) goal difference resulting from the group matches between the teams concerned;
f) greater number of goals scored in all group matches between the teams concerned;
g) drawing of lots by the FIFA Organising Committee."
All three groups are up for grabs! Cool.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Mexico upsets France (but makes Ireland happy?)
Mexico beat France 2-0.
So....if Mexico beats Uruguay and RSA beats France, I guess it comes down to the goal differential--which has Uruguay in a good position, given its 3-0 win over RSA.
If Uruguay beats Mexico, I think RSA needs to beat France by three goals.
If Mexico and Uruguay tie, they both go forward and France goes home...and RSA can enjoy the games as a gracious host.
So....if Mexico beats Uruguay and RSA beats France, I guess it comes down to the goal differential--which has Uruguay in a good position, given its 3-0 win over RSA.
If Uruguay beats Mexico, I think RSA needs to beat France by three goals.
If Mexico and Uruguay tie, they both go forward and France goes home...and RSA can enjoy the games as a gracious host.
Group Play, Second Round
I think the World Cup is the only thing I share with 1 billion people---other than the sun and the stars and the atmosphere and the planet.
We are well into the second phase of group play, with Groups A and B finishing their second games (MEX just upset FRA!). Everything is possible, but the situation is evolving rapidly. There will be a clear picture of the rankings, standings and possibilities for advancement in the next few days.
Viewers will also transition. Some fans will become even more interested in the particulars of the development of the tournament. Others will increasingly only want to watch the games that matter--- those matches between the very top teams because it is good soccer, and to see who emerges as the winner. Many obsessed observers (present company included) may really really really want to watch every minute but will be increasingly feeling the pressure of our responsibilities to work and home. So we have to make up from the week of 'real life' we just skipped, and possibly bank enough credit toward the next two weeks as the field narrows toward the final.
In any event we are going to know quite a bit more by June 22, when the final, third phase of group play commences. In the meantime the schedule gets a little back hard to follow. As I explained in a previous post, the first team in each group plays the third, and the second plays the 4th (i.e. England v. Algeria and USA v. Slovenia). But the precise timing can be less than linear so one needs to pay attention every day.
My recommendations for good games:
Friday 6/18 @ 7:30AM ET Germany v. Serbia
Saturday 6/19 @ 2:30PM ET Cameroon v. Denmark (All the games are good on Saturday…but if you only have time for one that's probably your best bet. The Netherlands play Japan at 7:30AM which will also be a good game although I expect The Netherlands will win efficiently.)
Sunday 6/20 @Brazil v. Ivory Coast @ 2:30PM ET
Monday 6/21 @ Portugal v. North Korea @7:30AM ET
By the end of the day Monday (6/21) the standings in each group will be sufficiently developed so that we can make educated predictions about the stakes of the remaining 16 games of group play.
So far, the major surprise is Switzerland’s victory of Spain. If Switzerland can beat Spain, then Switzerland should probably manage to beat the other two teams in the group, Honduras and Chile, as they are ranked far below Spain (but then again every team is ranked below Spain, except Brazil). The big problem here for Spain is that if it takes the second place in Group H, it will face (probably) Brazil in the Round of 16, rather than in the final. That is, of course, unless Brazil is upset by either Portugal or the Ivory Coast in the next games of group play.
Greece managed to beat Nigeria for the full 3 points--- I thought they were going down, until that unfortunate red card against Nigeria’s Sani Kaita. Fair call, but it is a bummer when bad behavior so profoundly influences the outcome of the tournament. You could see Kaita regretted his foul immediately—he left the field with his shirt pulled over his head in shame.
We are well into the second phase of group play, with Groups A and B finishing their second games (MEX just upset FRA!). Everything is possible, but the situation is evolving rapidly. There will be a clear picture of the rankings, standings and possibilities for advancement in the next few days.
Viewers will also transition. Some fans will become even more interested in the particulars of the development of the tournament. Others will increasingly only want to watch the games that matter--- those matches between the very top teams because it is good soccer, and to see who emerges as the winner. Many obsessed observers (present company included) may really really really want to watch every minute but will be increasingly feeling the pressure of our responsibilities to work and home. So we have to make up from the week of 'real life' we just skipped, and possibly bank enough credit toward the next two weeks as the field narrows toward the final.
In any event we are going to know quite a bit more by June 22, when the final, third phase of group play commences. In the meantime the schedule gets a little back hard to follow. As I explained in a previous post, the first team in each group plays the third, and the second plays the 4th (i.e. England v. Algeria and USA v. Slovenia). But the precise timing can be less than linear so one needs to pay attention every day.
My recommendations for good games:
Friday 6/18 @ 7:30AM ET Germany v. Serbia
Saturday 6/19 @ 2:30PM ET Cameroon v. Denmark (All the games are good on Saturday…but if you only have time for one that's probably your best bet. The Netherlands play Japan at 7:30AM which will also be a good game although I expect The Netherlands will win efficiently.)
Sunday 6/20 @Brazil v. Ivory Coast @ 2:30PM ET
Monday 6/21 @ Portugal v. North Korea @7:30AM ET
By the end of the day Monday (6/21) the standings in each group will be sufficiently developed so that we can make educated predictions about the stakes of the remaining 16 games of group play.
So far, the major surprise is Switzerland’s victory of Spain. If Switzerland can beat Spain, then Switzerland should probably manage to beat the other two teams in the group, Honduras and Chile, as they are ranked far below Spain (but then again every team is ranked below Spain, except Brazil). The big problem here for Spain is that if it takes the second place in Group H, it will face (probably) Brazil in the Round of 16, rather than in the final. That is, of course, unless Brazil is upset by either Portugal or the Ivory Coast in the next games of group play.
Greece managed to beat Nigeria for the full 3 points--- I thought they were going down, until that unfortunate red card against Nigeria’s Sani Kaita. Fair call, but it is a bummer when bad behavior so profoundly influences the outcome of the tournament. You could see Kaita regretted his foul immediately—he left the field with his shirt pulled over his head in shame.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Youth Day
June 16th is a National Holiday in South Africa to commemorate the Soweto massacre (1976). It is ‘Youth Day’ to honor the children who were killed or wounded in the struggle against apartheid. On June 16, 1976, schoolchildren protesting apartheid and its inequities in education were massacred by the South African security forces in Soweto, a township near Johannesburg.
By the mid-1970s many of the African National Congress (ANC) leaders were in jail, in exile or dead. South African students became a significant organized force, particularly in the absence of their elders.
Many South African youth were influenced by Steve Biko, the Black South African resistance leader. Biko (who was inspired by MLK Jr) believed that black South Africans were taught to believe that they were inferior to whites. Liberation, gained through Black Consciousness, would come when the mind was free from this violent ideology. Black Consciousness stressed the need for Black people in South Africa to free themselves from the mental oppression that taught them that white people were somehow innately superior to blacks.
School pupils sensitive to this message began to organize and protest the fact that their schools were to instruct in Afrikaans, the ‘language of the oppressor.’ On the 16th of June 1976 in Soweto (so named as the South West Township in relation to Johannesburg) a school pupils' committee organized a mass march to deliver their complaints to the local authorities. This peaceful march was met with a violent response; the police shot several students. The students then went on a rampage and destroyed much of the township; the riots continued for several days. Some 600 children are thought to have been killed in the ‘Soweto disturbances.’
The Soweto uprising, as it became known, marks an important point, because from that point onward there was constant and violent unrest across South Africa.
The massacre is powerfully reenacted as the closing 8 minutes of the movie, “Cry Freedom: The Steve Biko Story” (1988). I found a good clip on YouTube, but it is in French! At the end of the movie, white journalist Donald Woods (played by Kevin Kline) is fleeing apartheid South Africa with his family by plane. He reflects on a conversation he has with Steve Biko (Denzel Washington) on the eve of the Soweto riots. Biko tells Woods; “It is the beginning of the end. Change the way people think and you change everything.” Then the events of June 16th are depicted in painfully violent detail.
If the French bothers you start at 1:50.....
About.com provides this context:
“In 1953 the Apartheid Government enacted The Bantu Education Act, which established a Black Education Department in the Department of Native Affairs. The role of this department was to compile a curriculum that suited the "nature and requirements of the black people." The author of the legislation, Dr Hendrik Verwoerd (then Minister of Native Affairs, later Prime Minister), stated: "Natives [blacks] must be taught from an early age that equality with Europeans [whites] is not for them." Black people were not to receive an education that would lead them to aspire to positions they wouldn't be allowed to hold in society. Instead they were to receive education designed to provide them with skills to serve their own people in the homelands or to work in laboring jobs under whites.”
And:
“In 1975 South Africa entered a period of economic depression. Schools were starved of funds -- the government spent R644 a year on a white child's education but only R42 on a black child."
By the mid-1970s many of the African National Congress (ANC) leaders were in jail, in exile or dead. South African students became a significant organized force, particularly in the absence of their elders.
Many South African youth were influenced by Steve Biko, the Black South African resistance leader. Biko (who was inspired by MLK Jr) believed that black South Africans were taught to believe that they were inferior to whites. Liberation, gained through Black Consciousness, would come when the mind was free from this violent ideology. Black Consciousness stressed the need for Black people in South Africa to free themselves from the mental oppression that taught them that white people were somehow innately superior to blacks.
School pupils sensitive to this message began to organize and protest the fact that their schools were to instruct in Afrikaans, the ‘language of the oppressor.’ On the 16th of June 1976 in Soweto (so named as the South West Township in relation to Johannesburg) a school pupils' committee organized a mass march to deliver their complaints to the local authorities. This peaceful march was met with a violent response; the police shot several students. The students then went on a rampage and destroyed much of the township; the riots continued for several days. Some 600 children are thought to have been killed in the ‘Soweto disturbances.’
The Soweto uprising, as it became known, marks an important point, because from that point onward there was constant and violent unrest across South Africa.
The massacre is powerfully reenacted as the closing 8 minutes of the movie, “Cry Freedom: The Steve Biko Story” (1988). I found a good clip on YouTube, but it is in French! At the end of the movie, white journalist Donald Woods (played by Kevin Kline) is fleeing apartheid South Africa with his family by plane. He reflects on a conversation he has with Steve Biko (Denzel Washington) on the eve of the Soweto riots. Biko tells Woods; “It is the beginning of the end. Change the way people think and you change everything.” Then the events of June 16th are depicted in painfully violent detail.
If the French bothers you start at 1:50.....
About.com provides this context:
“In 1953 the Apartheid Government enacted The Bantu Education Act, which established a Black Education Department in the Department of Native Affairs. The role of this department was to compile a curriculum that suited the "nature and requirements of the black people." The author of the legislation, Dr Hendrik Verwoerd (then Minister of Native Affairs, later Prime Minister), stated: "Natives [blacks] must be taught from an early age that equality with Europeans [whites] is not for them." Black people were not to receive an education that would lead them to aspire to positions they wouldn't be allowed to hold in society. Instead they were to receive education designed to provide them with skills to serve their own people in the homelands or to work in laboring jobs under whites.”
And:
“In 1975 South Africa entered a period of economic depression. Schools were starved of funds -- the government spent R644 a year on a white child's education but only R42 on a black child."
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
1st phase of group play concludes on Wednesday
Wednesday, June 16th we’ll have the last two games of the first phase of group play, with Group H; Honduras v. Chile and then Spain v. Switzerland.
So far, the strong teams are Germany, Argentina, The Netherlands, and Brazil—and Spain is expected to shine.
One of the most notable aspects of the group play, so far, has been less the strong winners (predictable) and more the tie games, which (contrary to my earlier post) are actually quite exciting. Ties have kept me on the edge of my seat as Paraguay neutralized Italy, the South African team held its ground against Mexico, Ivory Coast forced Portugal into a shutout, and New Zealand equalized Slovakia in the 93rd minute.
Six out of the 14 games so far have ended in ties, which keeps the tournament wide open.
Wednesday PM we move into the second round of group play: The first team in each group plays the 3rd, the 2nd plays the 4th. So South Africa faces Uruguay, and then (Thursday) Mexico plays France. Remember—the top two teams from each group advance to the next round of 16 teams. That’s when we get to elimination play. Until June 26th, a loss isn’t an automatic out.
Other interesting news associated with the tournament:
*Somali militants have threatened World Cup fans. The BBC reported that a spokesman for the group, Sheikh Mohamed Abdi Aros, said Somalians should respect the ban on the World Cup: "We are warning all the youth of Somalia not to dare watch these World Cup matches. It is a waste of money and time and they will not benefit anything or get any experience by watching mad men jumping up and down."
I admit that I've been wasting a lot of time watching these mad men jump up and down.
*South African riot police in Durban fired tear gas to disperse hundreds of World Cup security stewards protesting over alleged pay cuts. (The article failed to mention the precise role of ‘stewards.’) The clash took place after the Australia/Germany game. The stewards said they were being paid only 190 rand ($25) a day, although they had been promised more.
More to say about this and other labor disputes associated with Fifa 2010.
*36 Dutch supporters were ejected from Monday’s game (against Denmark) because they were wearing orange dresses---? Apparently the disturbed party was Budweiser, the ‘official’ (gag) beer of Fifa 2010. Budweiser claimed that the Dutch ladies were advertising for Bavaria.
Get a life Budweiser!
*A South Korean television network accused North Korea of illegally showing matches from South Africa to its isolated populace. Apparently, “North Korea’s state-run Central Television has shown replays of four World Cup games, including the opening match between South Africa and Mexico, and a Saturday match in which South Korea defeated Greece 2-0……the replay of the South Korea-Greece game was shown on Monday evening, with occasionally favorable commentary on the skills of South Korean players.” South Korean TV is upset because they paid for the rights to show the games throughout the peninsula.
So now they have copyright issues along with that sunken sub to argue about.
*Hundreds of complaints have been made about the sound of vuvuzela horns. The French team complained that the horns were waking them up in their hotel.
Shucks.
Summing up so far:
The winners (3 points each):
South Korea
Argentina
Slovenia
Germany
Ghana
The Netherlands
Japan
Brazil
The ties (1 point each, and, more importantly, blocked their opponents from earning 3):
South Africa
Mexico
Uruguay
France
England
USA
Italy
Paraguay
Slovakia
New Zealand
Portugal
Ivory Coast
The losers:
Greece
Nigeria
Algeria
Australia
Serbia
Denmark
Cameroon
North Korea
So far, the strong teams are Germany, Argentina, The Netherlands, and Brazil—and Spain is expected to shine.
One of the most notable aspects of the group play, so far, has been less the strong winners (predictable) and more the tie games, which (contrary to my earlier post) are actually quite exciting. Ties have kept me on the edge of my seat as Paraguay neutralized Italy, the South African team held its ground against Mexico, Ivory Coast forced Portugal into a shutout, and New Zealand equalized Slovakia in the 93rd minute.
Six out of the 14 games so far have ended in ties, which keeps the tournament wide open.
Wednesday PM we move into the second round of group play: The first team in each group plays the 3rd, the 2nd plays the 4th. So South Africa faces Uruguay, and then (Thursday) Mexico plays France. Remember—the top two teams from each group advance to the next round of 16 teams. That’s when we get to elimination play. Until June 26th, a loss isn’t an automatic out.
Other interesting news associated with the tournament:
*Somali militants have threatened World Cup fans. The BBC reported that a spokesman for the group, Sheikh Mohamed Abdi Aros, said Somalians should respect the ban on the World Cup: "We are warning all the youth of Somalia not to dare watch these World Cup matches. It is a waste of money and time and they will not benefit anything or get any experience by watching mad men jumping up and down."
I admit that I've been wasting a lot of time watching these mad men jump up and down.
*South African riot police in Durban fired tear gas to disperse hundreds of World Cup security stewards protesting over alleged pay cuts. (The article failed to mention the precise role of ‘stewards.’) The clash took place after the Australia/Germany game. The stewards said they were being paid only 190 rand ($25) a day, although they had been promised more.
More to say about this and other labor disputes associated with Fifa 2010.
*36 Dutch supporters were ejected from Monday’s game (against Denmark) because they were wearing orange dresses---? Apparently the disturbed party was Budweiser, the ‘official’ (gag) beer of Fifa 2010. Budweiser claimed that the Dutch ladies were advertising for Bavaria.
Get a life Budweiser!
*A South Korean television network accused North Korea of illegally showing matches from South Africa to its isolated populace. Apparently, “North Korea’s state-run Central Television has shown replays of four World Cup games, including the opening match between South Africa and Mexico, and a Saturday match in which South Korea defeated Greece 2-0……the replay of the South Korea-Greece game was shown on Monday evening, with occasionally favorable commentary on the skills of South Korean players.” South Korean TV is upset because they paid for the rights to show the games throughout the peninsula.
So now they have copyright issues along with that sunken sub to argue about.
*Hundreds of complaints have been made about the sound of vuvuzela horns. The French team complained that the horns were waking them up in their hotel.
Shucks.
Summing up so far:
The winners (3 points each):
South Korea
Argentina
Slovenia
Germany
Ghana
The Netherlands
Japan
Brazil
The ties (1 point each, and, more importantly, blocked their opponents from earning 3):
South Africa
Mexico
Uruguay
France
England
USA
Italy
Paraguay
Slovakia
New Zealand
Portugal
Ivory Coast
The losers:
Greece
Nigeria
Algeria
Australia
Serbia
Denmark
Cameroon
North Korea
Foul Mouth?
hmmm I think the instant replay showed Ronaldo saying 'f$%^ you' or 'f$%^ off' to the Ivory Coast player that tackled him. Maybe that's why the ref yellow carded him, even though he was fouled?
Monday, June 14, 2010
Paraguay!
Nice goal by Paraguay against Italy (the 2006 champs). Header right into the tippy-top corner of the net. Nicely played and placed.
I just read that Paraguay's primary striker Salvador Cabanas is missing this tournament because he was SHOT in the HEAD in a bar in Mexico City in January. Apparently he is recovering well.
I was sorry to hear that Germany's favored goal-keeper Robert Enke committed suicide in November. At the memorial service, the clergywoman said "The death of this athlete shows that soccer is not everything in our life.... Behind popularity and success there could be profound loneliness and desperation."(huffingtonpost Nov 2009).
I do wonder what winning and losing means for these neo-liberal soccer subjectivities, given their dual roles in the private market place and the public imagination.
It is raining hard in the stadium, which is exactly as I remember June in Cape Town.
I just read that Paraguay's primary striker Salvador Cabanas is missing this tournament because he was SHOT in the HEAD in a bar in Mexico City in January. Apparently he is recovering well.
I was sorry to hear that Germany's favored goal-keeper Robert Enke committed suicide in November. At the memorial service, the clergywoman said "The death of this athlete shows that soccer is not everything in our life.... Behind popularity and success there could be profound loneliness and desperation."(huffingtonpost Nov 2009).
I do wonder what winning and losing means for these neo-liberal soccer subjectivities, given their dual roles in the private market place and the public imagination.
It is raining hard in the stadium, which is exactly as I remember June in Cape Town.
The myth of continents
This is the kind of bullshit geographical essentialism that irritates me:
“As the Argentine drums beat a rhythmic pulse, as the Nigerians’ horns subsided into forlorn bleats, there was no question of South American superiority over African determination.”---NYTs June 13, 2010.
I hate that crap, especially because I have to spend hours and hours trying to unwind the environmental determinism and ethnocentrism that my college freshmen generally bring with them to class.(1)
It’s not their fault--- it is what they’ve been taught. US students in the 21st century rarely receive a geographical education. What’s worse than the ignorance is that when geography is taught, it is often taught ‘wrong.’ Martin Lewis and Karen Wigen (2) argue in ‘The Myth of Continents’ that a ‘continental framework’ guides the US curriculum and produces geographic knowledge based on environmental determinism, which is the belief that social and cultural differences between human groups can ultimately be traced to differences in their physical environment.
The ‘myth’ that the world is organized in discreet, separate land masses (continents) underscores the corresponding erroneous belief that cultures and peoples are also bounded, fixed to and determined by static territories. The “myth of continents” guides much more than our physical notion of the world—it also contributes to “a tendency to let a continental framework structure our perceptions of the human community.” (ibid.)
In pedagogy, the continental system continues to be applied in such a way as to suggest that continents are at once physically and culturally constituted. By that I mean, that natural and human features somehow correspond to space/territory. Lewis and Wigen argue that having been taught that continents are the basic building blocks of global geography, students slide easily into assuming that the configuration of landmasses must correspond to the formation of cultural traits and social forms. It’s as if the continent itself imparts an essence to its human inhabitants.
Our notion that the world is made up of physical entities, neatly and logically separated from each other by water, transfers into a belief that cultures are separated from each other by place. For centuries (as Lewis and Wigen demonstrate) scholars have debated the logic of defining two, three, four, five or seven continents---there is very little coherence to any of the formulations. Even more importantly, in the 21st century, migration (of people, capital and ideas) is so intense that there are all sorts of people ---and ideas and cultural practices, not to mention circuits of capital---everywhere.
So: why is our thinking of geography and culture so far off the mark? Why do we insist of speaking of teams as if their ‘continent’ has anything to do with how they play?
+++++++++++++++++
1) I apologize for the generalization. I’m aware that I am speaking in broad strokes and I’m failing to account for the exceptions, indeed, the truly exceptional students who speak three languages, travel abroad for study and work, and actively and critically examine their local and global environments. I’m generalizing based on the some 3,000 students I have taught in my career as a university professor, but it is deliberately general to make a broad claim about meta-geographies.
2) Lewis, Martin W. and Karen E. Wigen. 1997. The Myth of Continents: A Critique of Metageography, University of California Press: Berkeley.
“As the Argentine drums beat a rhythmic pulse, as the Nigerians’ horns subsided into forlorn bleats, there was no question of South American superiority over African determination.”---NYTs June 13, 2010.
I hate that crap, especially because I have to spend hours and hours trying to unwind the environmental determinism and ethnocentrism that my college freshmen generally bring with them to class.(1)
It’s not their fault--- it is what they’ve been taught. US students in the 21st century rarely receive a geographical education. What’s worse than the ignorance is that when geography is taught, it is often taught ‘wrong.’ Martin Lewis and Karen Wigen (2) argue in ‘The Myth of Continents’ that a ‘continental framework’ guides the US curriculum and produces geographic knowledge based on environmental determinism, which is the belief that social and cultural differences between human groups can ultimately be traced to differences in their physical environment.
The ‘myth’ that the world is organized in discreet, separate land masses (continents) underscores the corresponding erroneous belief that cultures and peoples are also bounded, fixed to and determined by static territories. The “myth of continents” guides much more than our physical notion of the world—it also contributes to “a tendency to let a continental framework structure our perceptions of the human community.” (ibid.)
In pedagogy, the continental system continues to be applied in such a way as to suggest that continents are at once physically and culturally constituted. By that I mean, that natural and human features somehow correspond to space/territory. Lewis and Wigen argue that having been taught that continents are the basic building blocks of global geography, students slide easily into assuming that the configuration of landmasses must correspond to the formation of cultural traits and social forms. It’s as if the continent itself imparts an essence to its human inhabitants.
Our notion that the world is made up of physical entities, neatly and logically separated from each other by water, transfers into a belief that cultures are separated from each other by place. For centuries (as Lewis and Wigen demonstrate) scholars have debated the logic of defining two, three, four, five or seven continents---there is very little coherence to any of the formulations. Even more importantly, in the 21st century, migration (of people, capital and ideas) is so intense that there are all sorts of people ---and ideas and cultural practices, not to mention circuits of capital---everywhere.
So: why is our thinking of geography and culture so far off the mark? Why do we insist of speaking of teams as if their ‘continent’ has anything to do with how they play?
+++++++++++++++++
1) I apologize for the generalization. I’m aware that I am speaking in broad strokes and I’m failing to account for the exceptions, indeed, the truly exceptional students who speak three languages, travel abroad for study and work, and actively and critically examine their local and global environments. I’m generalizing based on the some 3,000 students I have taught in my career as a university professor, but it is deliberately general to make a broad claim about meta-geographies.
2) Lewis, Martin W. and Karen E. Wigen. 1997. The Myth of Continents: A Critique of Metageography, University of California Press: Berkeley.
Nice goal Japan!
But Cameroon looks good, too. Different tempo than the DEN/Dutch game.
Still struggling with my knee-jerk feeling that I want 'Africa' to win.
Still struggling with my knee-jerk feeling that I want 'Africa' to win.
oops.
own goal for Denmark. that sucks but we'll take it I guess.
what do you guys think? is that worst than the English goalie's fumble?
what do you guys think? is that worst than the English goalie's fumble?
HUP HOLAND!
All ambivalence about nationalism and geographical determinism aside, GO HOLLAND!
My favorite team.
My favorite team.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Group D promises good stuff
Why do I want 'Africa' to win? Why am I cheering for one team more than any other? Why is 'underdog' somehow associated in my mind with certain imagined communities (i.e. nations) more than others? What is the relationship between 'underdog' and the imagining? I think this is the social-construction of GEOGRAPHY and RANK that I find provocative in Fifa (and on Planet Earth).
Terrific morning of futbol. I enjoyed the Ghana/Serbia game more than the Algeria/Slovenia match, but that could have been because I was under-caffeinated at 7:30 AM. Both games saw a player expelled on a red card, and in each instance the team playing with 10 lost -- Algeria by one, Serbia by one.
Group D looks like it is going to give us good stuff!
Other interesting news: 16 Al Jazeera journalists/staff had a scare-- the plane taking them to today's Algeria/Slovenia match had to turn around and return to the Johannesburg airport for an emergency landing! And the US team apparently encountered elephants on the road between their lodging and the stadium. Serbia and Ghana both have Serbian coaches, and brothers might face each other in the Germany-Ghana match on June 23rd.
Terrific morning of futbol. I enjoyed the Ghana/Serbia game more than the Algeria/Slovenia match, but that could have been because I was under-caffeinated at 7:30 AM. Both games saw a player expelled on a red card, and in each instance the team playing with 10 lost -- Algeria by one, Serbia by one.
Group D looks like it is going to give us good stuff!
Other interesting news: 16 Al Jazeera journalists/staff had a scare-- the plane taking them to today's Algeria/Slovenia match had to turn around and return to the Johannesburg airport for an emergency landing! And the US team apparently encountered elephants on the road between their lodging and the stadium. Serbia and Ghana both have Serbian coaches, and brothers might face each other in the Germany-Ghana match on June 23rd.
Algeria v. Slovenia
Looking pretty even after 70 minutes....
until the hand ball! and the red card!
The ref made a good call and the Algerian player used bad judgement to raise his HAND in the BOX to block a ball, so the red card was deserved... but it is a shame when the outcome of the game is so influenced by a ruling.
until the hand ball! and the red card!
The ref made a good call and the Algerian player used bad judgement to raise his HAND in the BOX to block a ball, so the red card was deserved... but it is a shame when the outcome of the game is so influenced by a ruling.
Saturday, June 12, 2010
US/UK hype
This match is both a product and a producer of the hype surrounding the so-called special relationship between England and the USA.
As I said in the earlier post re: nationalism, I don't have a favorite team in this game. I'll root for the under-dog, whichever identity is more like David than Goliath. I'm more interested in seeing Algeria and Slovenia advance, so the best outcome would be a 0/0 tie (see earlier caveat on ties and their discontents).
I will watch the game and I expect to be super-annoyed by the jingoism, ethnocentrism, and general geographical essentializations that tend to cloud discussion of the USA and its presumed greatness.
I was in Holland in 2002, watching the World Cup (hosted by Korea and Japan) when Germany played the US (Can't remember if it was quarter or semi finals but it was up there, important game). I asked my Dutch friends who they were rooting for and they said 'it's tough.'
As I said in the earlier post re: nationalism, I don't have a favorite team in this game. I'll root for the under-dog, whichever identity is more like David than Goliath. I'm more interested in seeing Algeria and Slovenia advance, so the best outcome would be a 0/0 tie (see earlier caveat on ties and their discontents).
I will watch the game and I expect to be super-annoyed by the jingoism, ethnocentrism, and general geographical essentializations that tend to cloud discussion of the USA and its presumed greatness.
I was in Holland in 2002, watching the World Cup (hosted by Korea and Japan) when Germany played the US (Can't remember if it was quarter or semi finals but it was up there, important game). I asked my Dutch friends who they were rooting for and they said 'it's tough.'
Argentina v. Nigeria
Good game!
Maradona looks like he has put on weight--maybe he has quit his c@(# habit?
LOVE the Argentina goalie's ponytail!
Maradona looks like he has put on weight--maybe he has quit his c@(# habit?
LOVE the Argentina goalie's ponytail!
Friday, June 11, 2010
Ties are like kissing your brother---except when it keeps France from dominating the group!
Both games in Group A ended in a tie today, which means all four teams get one point. Interesting.... probably better news for RSA and Uruguay than France and Mexico.
I need to go for a swim and think a bit about nationalism. More soon!
I need to go for a swim and think a bit about nationalism. More soon!
GOOAAALLLLLLLLLLLLLL!
This one for Mexico! Ties it up.
Ties are possible during group play; each team gets one (1) point toward qualifying. A win is three (3) points, and a loss is zero.
During the quarterfinals and onward, games go into overtime--no ties.
Ties are possible during group play; each team gets one (1) point toward qualifying. A win is three (3) points, and a loss is zero.
During the quarterfinals and onward, games go into overtime--no ties.
Can nationalism ever be a good thing?
The World Cup is both local and global (as is everything---simultaneously local and global). The category of the 'nation' is also readily apparent during the games, but is more problematic.
I'm accustomed to viewing nationalism with suspicion. Although some point to the emancipatory aspects,(struggles for self-determination over a defined territory), nationalism has also been deployed to fuel authoritarianism, xenophobia and the associated violence. Benedict Anderson (1990) argued that nations are 'imagined communities' --although occupying geographical space, the essence of the nation is the shared belief that it exists, and that its sovereignty is associated with identities.
As I'm watching the games I generally find myself rooting for the under-dog (except for whichever team happens to be playing The Netherlands), regardless of the particular national association. In this afternoon's match between the UK and the US I want BOTH teams to lose, so that Algeria and Slovenia have a better chance of advancing. Although these 32 teams comprised of 23 men are representing 'nations,' most of the players are hired labor for private teams all over the world. Is nationalism, in the World Cup, a positive or negative passion?
I'm accustomed to viewing nationalism with suspicion. Although some point to the emancipatory aspects,(struggles for self-determination over a defined territory), nationalism has also been deployed to fuel authoritarianism, xenophobia and the associated violence. Benedict Anderson (1990) argued that nations are 'imagined communities' --although occupying geographical space, the essence of the nation is the shared belief that it exists, and that its sovereignty is associated with identities.
As I'm watching the games I generally find myself rooting for the under-dog (except for whichever team happens to be playing The Netherlands), regardless of the particular national association. In this afternoon's match between the UK and the US I want BOTH teams to lose, so that Algeria and Slovenia have a better chance of advancing. Although these 32 teams comprised of 23 men are representing 'nations,' most of the players are hired labor for private teams all over the world. Is nationalism, in the World Cup, a positive or negative passion?
sympathy for the Mandelas, excitment in RSA
Very sorry to read this morning that Mr. Mandela will miss the opening game today because of a death in the family. Mr. Mandela, himself almost 92 (July 18th) and one of the most famous survivors of the 20th century, lost a 13 year old great granddaughter. Apparently she was killed in a car accident in Soweto. I can fully imagine that the festivities were intense on World Cup Eve and that the roads were made dangerous by the excitement and alcohol. What a pity.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Obama should go to RSA this weekend
Obama should take his family and go to RSA this weekend for the start of the World Cup. He could watch tomorrow's game, South Africa v. Mexico (10AM EST) with Nelson Mandela from a sky box. Obama could cheer for BOTH teams and make kind remarks about how Mexico is more than a good neighbor, it is a part us and integral for our well being, etc. Then Mandela could watch the game Saturday (2:30PM EST), US v. England, and HE could have kind, (re)conciliatory words for both teams.
Obama has been described as America's Mandela. South Africa and the USA have a lot in common. In my big lecture class (250 students--'Peoples, Places and Cultures') I usually introduce the week on RSA/apartheid/rainbow nation with the audio of a speech by Robert Kennedy, in Cape Town, June 6, 1966:
RFK begins:
"I came here because of my deep interest and affection for a land settled by the Dutch in the mid-seventeenth century, then taken over by the British, and at last independent; a land in which the native inhabitants were at first subdued, but relations with whom remain a problem to this day; a land which defined itself on a hostile frontier; a land which has tamed rich natural resources through the energetic application of modern technology; a land which once imported slaves, and now must struggle to wipe out the last traces of that former bondage. I refer, of course, to the United States of America....."
In any event, my advice concerning getting the most out of the World Cup is to watch all of the games. I know it is a big chunk of time, but it is worth it. When Brazil plays the runner-up from Group H (probably Switzerland) you are going to wish you had seen Brazil already play (say, against Portugal) and the same re: the Switzerland v. Spain match that occurs during the group phase.
The meet opens with South Africa versus Mexico at 10AM EST. South Africa draws the first match as the host country. Mexico was a draw from the 'pot' (see previous post on the geographical fiction of the 'pots'). South Africa and Mexico are both in Group A, along with Uruguay and France, who play the second game on Friday June 11th at 2:30PM EST). We all hope Uruguay beats France to revenge Ireland (more on that tomorrow).
For first-timers or people who joined the last games too late to figure it out, the World Cup proceeds as follows:
Group play --June 11- 25th.
The 'groups' are the eight groups of four teams each. These were formed during the drawing of the 'pots.' During group play, each team plays the three others in its group. So South Africa plays Mexico tomorrow, and then Uruguay in a few days, and then France a few days later. All the groups do this. At the end of the 'group play' (June 25th) the top two teams from each group move into the quarter- and semi-finals.
That's why it is important to watch ALL the games--so that you can see each team play before the qualifying stage.
For now, just make sure you have organized your day so you have time from 10AM-4:30 PM to watch. If you are a civil servant consider moving to Honduras.
Obama has been described as America's Mandela. South Africa and the USA have a lot in common. In my big lecture class (250 students--'Peoples, Places and Cultures') I usually introduce the week on RSA/apartheid/rainbow nation with the audio of a speech by Robert Kennedy, in Cape Town, June 6, 1966:
RFK begins:
"I came here because of my deep interest and affection for a land settled by the Dutch in the mid-seventeenth century, then taken over by the British, and at last independent; a land in which the native inhabitants were at first subdued, but relations with whom remain a problem to this day; a land which defined itself on a hostile frontier; a land which has tamed rich natural resources through the energetic application of modern technology; a land which once imported slaves, and now must struggle to wipe out the last traces of that former bondage. I refer, of course, to the United States of America....."
In any event, my advice concerning getting the most out of the World Cup is to watch all of the games. I know it is a big chunk of time, but it is worth it. When Brazil plays the runner-up from Group H (probably Switzerland) you are going to wish you had seen Brazil already play (say, against Portugal) and the same re: the Switzerland v. Spain match that occurs during the group phase.
The meet opens with South Africa versus Mexico at 10AM EST. South Africa draws the first match as the host country. Mexico was a draw from the 'pot' (see previous post on the geographical fiction of the 'pots'). South Africa and Mexico are both in Group A, along with Uruguay and France, who play the second game on Friday June 11th at 2:30PM EST). We all hope Uruguay beats France to revenge Ireland (more on that tomorrow).
For first-timers or people who joined the last games too late to figure it out, the World Cup proceeds as follows:
Group play --June 11- 25th.
The 'groups' are the eight groups of four teams each. These were formed during the drawing of the 'pots.' During group play, each team plays the three others in its group. So South Africa plays Mexico tomorrow, and then Uruguay in a few days, and then France a few days later. All the groups do this. At the end of the 'group play' (June 25th) the top two teams from each group move into the quarter- and semi-finals.
That's why it is important to watch ALL the games--so that you can see each team play before the qualifying stage.
For now, just make sure you have organized your day so you have time from 10AM-4:30 PM to watch. If you are a civil servant consider moving to Honduras.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
fever pitch
Let's see if I can share a photo, sent to me today from Cape Town:
Thanks Janice!
And speaking of getting into the spirit of the World Cup, let's hear it for the Honduran government, which has announced that 200,000 public employees will have time off in order to watch the national team play. (As far as I know this is one of the only reasons which we can pleased with the Honduran government, which took power following a coup last year.) According to The Associated Press, "The government has urged private enterprise to do the same."
As I mentioned yesterday, I've been provoked by Fifa's assertion that qualifying for the World Cup is a matter of 1) GEOGRAPHY and 2) RANK. I find both of these terms suspicious, especially when used to determine something so important as participation in the world's biggest event. The absurdity of the 'pots' illustrates the lack of geographical coherence. Given that geographical coherence is absent, and is indeed always absent and in need of being produced, what is at the root of the social-construction of these geographical fictions?
Tomorrow is World Cup Eve! I'll discuss times, schedules, teams, nationalism(s) and local/global dialectics.
Thanks Janice!
And speaking of getting into the spirit of the World Cup, let's hear it for the Honduran government, which has announced that 200,000 public employees will have time off in order to watch the national team play. (As far as I know this is one of the only reasons which we can pleased with the Honduran government, which took power following a coup last year.) According to The Associated Press, "The government has urged private enterprise to do the same."
As I mentioned yesterday, I've been provoked by Fifa's assertion that qualifying for the World Cup is a matter of 1) GEOGRAPHY and 2) RANK. I find both of these terms suspicious, especially when used to determine something so important as participation in the world's biggest event. The absurdity of the 'pots' illustrates the lack of geographical coherence. Given that geographical coherence is absent, and is indeed always absent and in need of being produced, what is at the root of the social-construction of these geographical fictions?
Tomorrow is World Cup Eve! I'll discuss times, schedules, teams, nationalism(s) and local/global dialectics.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
pots and tots
Dear Friends, thanks for checking in.
I'm still fiddling with the format and font. I'd like the color scheme to be orange, blue and white, and generally gray. I hope to have things looking better by Friday. Go RSA!
It seems that teams are experiencing some pre-tourny troubles as well. In addition to the injuries experienced by British and Ivory Coast stars, the New Zealand team failed to carry off its first practice in South Africa yesterday. Reuters reported that the NZ team, (rather unfortunately, in post-apartheid South Africa, named the 'All Whites') cut training short when "smoke from a surrounding township made a full work-out a threat to the players health."
Apparently,
"Impoverished households use wood fires and paraffin to keep warm and to cook and the smoke left a low white blanket wafting over Sinaba Stadium...," which is the All Whites' training field, located near a township outside Johannesburg. The team chose the site "....as it was identified as the best facility near the upmarket Serengeti Golf and Wildlife Estate" where the team is housed.
Get ready for a lot of this from the international press;
"The immaculate turf and good seats in the stadium are in stark contrast to the litter and run-down homes outside."
(I'll post links to actual urls when I learn how---help Mercury!)
In any event we'll have lots of time to examine the 'shocking' poverty and dismayed discoveries of divisions of wealth in RSA. What I want to discuss today is Fifa's provokative contention that the World Cup is based on GEOGRAPHY and RANK, which as I said yesterday I find very suspicious terms.
Take geography: The thirty-two teams are drawn from four 'pots' that allegedly represent three geographical regions, as well as one pot based on Fifa's ranking (the 'seeded' pot).
Here are the four pots: you tell me if you can detect any kind of geographical logic to The Order of Things:
Pot One: (Host and top 7)
South Africa, Brazil, Spain, The Netherlands, Italy, Germany, Argentina, England.
Pot Two: (Asia, North America and Oceania)
Australia, Japan, North Korea, South Korea, Honduras, Mexico, United States and New Zealand.
Pot Three: (Africa and South America)
Algeria, Cameroon, Cote de'Ivoire, Ghana, Nigeria, Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay.
Pot Four: (Europe)
Denmark, France, Greece, Portugal, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland.
The groups are constituted from a draw of one team from each of four pots for eight groups.
Clearly, the geographical imaginations that serve as the foundational assumptions of the 'pots' go a long way to organizing the production of the 'rankings.'
More tomorrow, unless I am called to California to attend to family crisis. (Games are on at 4:30 AM PST---gr0an)>
I'm still fiddling with the format and font. I'd like the color scheme to be orange, blue and white, and generally gray. I hope to have things looking better by Friday. Go RSA!
It seems that teams are experiencing some pre-tourny troubles as well. In addition to the injuries experienced by British and Ivory Coast stars, the New Zealand team failed to carry off its first practice in South Africa yesterday. Reuters reported that the NZ team, (rather unfortunately, in post-apartheid South Africa, named the 'All Whites') cut training short when "smoke from a surrounding township made a full work-out a threat to the players health."
Apparently,
"Impoverished households use wood fires and paraffin to keep warm and to cook and the smoke left a low white blanket wafting over Sinaba Stadium...," which is the All Whites' training field, located near a township outside Johannesburg. The team chose the site "....as it was identified as the best facility near the upmarket Serengeti Golf and Wildlife Estate" where the team is housed.
Get ready for a lot of this from the international press;
"The immaculate turf and good seats in the stadium are in stark contrast to the litter and run-down homes outside."
(I'll post links to actual urls when I learn how---help Mercury!)
In any event we'll have lots of time to examine the 'shocking' poverty and dismayed discoveries of divisions of wealth in RSA. What I want to discuss today is Fifa's provokative contention that the World Cup is based on GEOGRAPHY and RANK, which as I said yesterday I find very suspicious terms.
Take geography: The thirty-two teams are drawn from four 'pots' that allegedly represent three geographical regions, as well as one pot based on Fifa's ranking (the 'seeded' pot).
Here are the four pots: you tell me if you can detect any kind of geographical logic to The Order of Things:
Pot One: (Host and top 7)
South Africa, Brazil, Spain, The Netherlands, Italy, Germany, Argentina, England.
Pot Two: (Asia, North America and Oceania)
Australia, Japan, North Korea, South Korea, Honduras, Mexico, United States and New Zealand.
Pot Three: (Africa and South America)
Algeria, Cameroon, Cote de'Ivoire, Ghana, Nigeria, Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay.
Pot Four: (Europe)
Denmark, France, Greece, Portugal, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland.
The groups are constituted from a draw of one team from each of four pots for eight groups.
Clearly, the geographical imaginations that serve as the foundational assumptions of the 'pots' go a long way to organizing the production of the 'rankings.'
More tomorrow, unless I am called to California to attend to family crisis. (Games are on at 4:30 AM PST---gr0an)>
Monday, June 7, 2010
Why Blog Fifa 2010?
Welcome to Love the World Cup:
Thanks for checking in. This is my first attempt at blogging so I expect the next few days will be a bit rough as I work on page lay-out, and figure out how to post/link/navigate. Hopefully I'll have learned enough by Friday. Kick-off!
Of course I am for RSA. Sorry Mexico; I hope you beat France and I'm neutral on your match with Uruguay.
Why Blog the 2010 World Cup?
1) I read blogs but I have yet to try to produce one. I'm hoping that I learn more about the genre and the community and the internets more broadly.
2) I want to watch all 64 World Cup games, June 11th-July 11th. Except for six rest days (June 30th, July 1st, 4th, 5th, 8th and 9th), there are two-four games on every day between this Friday and the final. That's a lot of time--surely I must have some productive project attached?
3) I want to write something different. I'm really tired of trying to make sense of war crimes and especially of trying to integrate social theory with the study of violence and power. I'll still have deadlines for my 'real' work, but I can write with animo about the World Cup. I've been banging my head against genocide and crimes against humanity for a while now (without figuring out how to prevent such violence). Maybe if I try to think about something different my head will clear and I'll be able to come up with some answers.
4) In announcing the groups and fixtures for the 2010 World Cup, Fifa explained that the 'pots' from which the groups were organized are based on two elements: geography and rank; highly suspicious terms for such an important event as the World Cup. The World Cup is the site of multiple and competing geographical imaginations, where 'power' (rank) and 'place/space' (geography) are mutually-constituted. Write on!
Regards,
Amy
Thanks for checking in. This is my first attempt at blogging so I expect the next few days will be a bit rough as I work on page lay-out, and figure out how to post/link/navigate. Hopefully I'll have learned enough by Friday. Kick-off!
Of course I am for RSA. Sorry Mexico; I hope you beat France and I'm neutral on your match with Uruguay.
Why Blog the 2010 World Cup?
1) I read blogs but I have yet to try to produce one. I'm hoping that I learn more about the genre and the community and the internets more broadly.
2) I want to watch all 64 World Cup games, June 11th-July 11th. Except for six rest days (June 30th, July 1st, 4th, 5th, 8th and 9th), there are two-four games on every day between this Friday and the final. That's a lot of time--surely I must have some productive project attached?
3) I want to write something different. I'm really tired of trying to make sense of war crimes and especially of trying to integrate social theory with the study of violence and power. I'll still have deadlines for my 'real' work, but I can write with animo about the World Cup. I've been banging my head against genocide and crimes against humanity for a while now (without figuring out how to prevent such violence). Maybe if I try to think about something different my head will clear and I'll be able to come up with some answers.
4) In announcing the groups and fixtures for the 2010 World Cup, Fifa explained that the 'pots' from which the groups were organized are based on two elements: geography and rank; highly suspicious terms for such an important event as the World Cup. The World Cup is the site of multiple and competing geographical imaginations, where 'power' (rank) and 'place/space' (geography) are mutually-constituted. Write on!
Regards,
Amy
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
