“Until I am no longer president, there will be no chance” for replays, said Sepp Blatter, the head of soccer’s governing body FIFA, which said yesterday that the France-Ireland result stood.

Time for a coup.

Would the same reaction/result have occured had this happened to France instead of Ireland?

Was there also a ref in soccer, born in France and assigned to just watch that single spot for handballs?

That play by Henry was disappointing because I admire Henry's game a lot and it seemed beneath him. Personally, I'd rather my team lose than win like that. Zidane, Riberry and Henry turned me into a quasi-fan of the French team, but I'll be rooting for them to be quickly eliminated in S. Africa.

Just ban France altogether. Not just from the World Cup, but from the world, period.

That play by Henry was disappointing because I admire Henry's game a lot and it seemed beneath him. Personally, I'd rather my team lose than win like that. Zidane, Riberry and Henry turned me into a quasi-fan of the French team, but I'll be rooting for them to be quickly eliminated in S. Africa.

But, Fabien Barthez should have overwhelmingly turned you against them just because he's such a massive shithead.

Fabien Barthez should have overwhelmingly turned you against them just because he's such a massive shithead.

Still less annoying than David Seaman.

#### France, indeed. I hope they go 3 goalless games in group play and finish in 32nd place. Basterds.

And FIFA's refusal to even consider replay--even just for disputed goals--is, frankly, a joke. The small nations need to join together and orchestrate a coup, or else these nonsensical things will keep on happening over and over and over again.

But, Fabien Barthez should have overwhelmingly turned you against them just because he's such a massive shithead.

No one's perfect!

That play by Henry was disappointing because I admire Henry's game a lot and it seemed beneath him.

If it's any consolation, Henry has called for a rematch.

If it's any consolation, Henry has called for a rematch.

They don't need to replay it, just take it to penalties, which is what would have happened without the goal. It's cool of Henry to make the suggestion, but I wonder if he would have made it if he thought there was any way in hell FIFA would go for it. Also, Aresene Wenger is pretty awesome. He makes me disappointed I chose Tottenham as my EPL team.

I've seen Henry shamelessly dive before, and as said, I seriously doubt he would ask for a rematch if there was the slightest chane it would happen. If he really felt bad about it, he'd have kicked the ball in his own net after kick-off...or was it sudden death? ooops.

Anyway, all this call for a ban/rematch is so much modern soccer felgercarb. IN MY DAY...we didn't wear ##### shinpads, diving was rare, faking an injury then getting up as if it never happened was almost unheard of or ridiculed. And if you did get away with an infraction, it was the refs who were abused, not the players.

Just ban France altogether. Not just from the World Cup, but from the world, period.

Why do that when we can instead Balkanize? Being born in Paris, Henry would be playing for Gaul. Zidane would have played for French Liguria.

I've seen Henry shamelessly dive before

This clearly makes him worse than everyone else who has every played professional soccer in Europe.

I've seen Henry shamelessly dive before, and as said, I seriously doubt he would ask for a rematch if there was the slightest chane it would happen. If he really felt bad about it, he'd have kicked the ball in his own net after kick-off...or was it sudden death?

It was not sudden death, but scoring an intentional own goal after the fact would've put Ireland through on the away goals rule. The only scoreline that would've resulted in the tie going to penalties was 0-1 to Ireland.

For those better acquainted with the referee rulebook:

On that same play, it looked like two players from France were off-sides. Although neither of the players were Henry (thus neither player had first touch), I saw it mentioned that off-sides still should've been whistled because the players were in an 'attacking area'. Can anyone clarify -- can off-sides be called even if the off-sides player isn't the one to have the first-touch (but is close enough to the play to have an immediate impact)?

On that same play, it looked like two players from France were off-sides. Although neither of the players were Henry (thus neither player had first touch), I saw it mentioned that off-sides still should've been whistled because the players were in an 'attacking area'. Can anyone clarify -- can off-sides be called even if the off-sides player isn't the one to have the first-touch (but is close enough to the play to have an immediate impact)?

I'm not sure, but I think that's not offside. Anyways, it might look like Squilacci, who was offside, got the first touch of the ball.

Just ban France altogether. Not just from the World Cup, but from the world, period.

Can we keep the baguettes?

At least Russia lost, so FIFA didn't get everything they wanted. Too bad about Costa Rica, though.

How about we keep the south of France. The people seem nice there. And up as far as Chenonceaux. And the Alps! Grenoble is lots of fun.
Actually I've never been to Brittany, but I hear Bretons are cool people.

How about we just sink Paris?

I'm probably heading to Freiburg this spring, but I'll probably spend a day or two across the border in France. How is that region of France? I've never been before.

13. Dale Sams Posted: November 20, 2009 at 12:42 PM (#3392522)
I've seen Henry shamelessly dive before, and as said, I seriously doubt he would ask for a rematch if there was the slightest chane it would happen. If he really felt bad about it, he'd have kicked the ball in his own net after kick-off...or was it sudden death? ooops.

I've seen pretty much EVERY soccer player shamelessly cheat before, ESPECIALLY those hypocrites who like to portray themselves as non cheaters, ie the English and Germans.

20. Shooty Did Not Kill McGurk Posted: November 20, 2009 at 01:26 PM (#3392601)
At least Russia lost, so FIFA didn't get everything they wanted. Too bad about Costa Rica, though.

Russia not getting in isn't a good thing. They are (very) good, play attractive soccer, and have some good young players coming up. They choked.

On that same play, it looked like two players from France were off-sides. Although neither of the players were Henry (thus neither player had first touch), I saw it mentioned that off-sides still should've been whistled because the players were in an 'attacking area'. Can anyone clarify -- can off-sides be called even if the off-sides player isn't the one to have the first-touch (but is close enough to the play to have an immediate impact)?

All that is necessary for a call is for the player in the offside position to "be involved in the play." Thus, even if they don't touch the ball, they should be whistled for offside if they are screening the goalie, fake a play on the ball, or make an actual attempt on the ball but fail to make contact.

Russia not getting in isn't a good thing. They are (very) good, and play attractive soccer. They choked.

I've got nothing against the Russian team, I just didn't like the way FIFA jiggered the qualifying rules on the fly to try to clear a path for France/Russia/Portugal. I'm actually fine with seeding, but if that's the way they wanted to do it, it should have been in the rules before qualifying started.

On that same play, it looked like two players from France were off-sides. Although neither of the players were Henry (thus neither player had first touch), I saw it mentioned that off-sides still should've been whistled because the players were in an 'attacking area'. Can anyone clarify -- can off-sides be called even if the off-sides player isn't the one to have the first-touch (but is close enough to the play to have an immediate impact)?

There is not a clear answer to this. The rulebook definitely states that if you are in an offside position when the ball is played and you are materially involved in the play then it should be involved. But it's ultimately up to each individual ref where the line should actually be drawn.

For instance, someone standing in offside position directly in front of the keeper blocking his line of sight is clearly offside. Someone standing in offside position on the sideline fixing his laces is clearly not. In between...it's debatable.

If not for the handball, there would have definitely been complaints about the offside thing, but I don't think people would have taken them very seriously. It's a classic example of the sort of thing where your judgment will vary dramatically depending on who benefits and everyone knows it.

On a larger note, I am continually dismayed with the intransigence of the football authorities on the question of video replay or goal-line technology. It's just infuriating.

On a larger note, I am continually dismayed with the intransigence of the football authorities on the question of video replay or goal-line technology. It's just infuriating.

I don't get this, either, especially as it won't even come up very often. If you limit replay to just make a ruling on contested goals, it won't come up very often and it will mean everything to the result.

Agreed that Russia failing to make it is really unfortunate. I hated the last-minute decision to seed, but I also really like the Russia team. Great players, attacking football, Hiddink on the sideline - they could've made a major splash in South Africa.

That said, I also love it when tiny countries make it. So it'll be fun to watch Slovenia and New Zealand.

I don't get this, either, especially as it won't even come up very often. If you limit replay to just make a ruling on contested goals, it won't come up very often and it will mean everything to the result.

It's just a retrograde institution.

Their complete unwillingness to actually DO something about diving is also aggravating. Everyone went nuts when UEFA slapped a ban on Eduardo but I think that was mostly because it was arbitrary. If they *actually* instituted a policy where they set up a panel to go back and check the tapes after every match and punish diving, I think the fans would love it.

But they've got this fetishization for the referee as absolute decision-maker which ends up destroying the credibility of actual refs. We have a system where the mistakes are OBVIOUS from TV but refs simply can't be expected to get them right right on the ground. If you admitted this and actually did something about it, people would complain a lot less about the ref.

So it'll be fun to watch Slovenia and New Zealand.

And Honduras! I was very impressed by their reaction to a heart-breaking loss to the US. I hope they shock people in S. Africa.

Can we keep people of French descent? I'd rather like to keep on living. If it helps, I'm of French Canadian descent rather than straight French.

Speaking of the World Cup in general, now that the field is set...I think my favorites are Brazil and England with one of the African teams--probably the Ivory Coast. My choices are for a team that shocks everyone by making it to the semis are Australia, Denmark and Mexico (only because I think they've been written off.) I want to pick the US as a dark horse, but I just don't see it yet. I haven't actually seen the Ivory Coast play yet, so that's just me parroting what I've read. I really do think England is both talented and deep enough to make a run for the title, though. And Brazil is Brazil. I won't try to pretend I know enough about this yet to pick against them. I just like them better than Spain or the Dutch.

I see Honduras as a much 'bigger' football nation than the others. They've got some legitimate great players. Palacios would start for most countries in the world. Suazo is getting up there in years but was great in Italy for most of the decade and made a pretty big transfer to Inter a couple years ago. Julio Cesar de Leon has been a solid player in Serie A for a while. And so on.

I've only seen Slovenia play once or twice but they are not in the same class as Honduras (much less Russia) from what I can tell.

But that's the excitement.

Can we keep people of French descent? I'd rather like to keep on living. If it helps, I'm of French Canadian descent rather than straight French.

I will also admit to having French-Canadian ancestry. So sue me!

Can we keep people of French descent? I'd rather like to keep on living. If it helps, I'm of French Canadian descent rather than straight French.

I will also admit to having French-Canadian ancestry. So sue me!

That's even worse. You should both be force fed poutine until you look like the gluttony guy from Se7en

That's even worse. You should both be fed poutine until you look like the gluttony guy from Se7en

How do you know I don't already?

If they *actually* instituted a policy where they set up a panel to go back and check the tapes after every match and punish diving, I think the fans would love it.

I've been in favor of this for years. The problem is not that the ref on the field can't see everything, it's that players take advantage of the fact that he can't see everything. Either add another ref (or two) like hockey, or review unsportsmanlike plays and hand down suspensions after the fact. Suspend a couple guys for blatant diving and I think you'll see the problem start to clear up pretty quickly.

This is probably unfair and will end up making me look stupid someday, but based on the limited experience of living in England for a while, and everything I know about English football, I have complete faith in their ability to take a talented, deep team and make a total hash of it.

I have complete faith in their ability to take a talented, deep team and make a total hash of it.

Isn't this why they hired an Italian guy?

I don't get this, either, especially as it won't even come up very often. If you limit replay to just make a ruling on contested goals, it won't come up very often and it will mean everything to the result.

Well, the thing with replay and goal line technology is stuff like that isn't feasible for lower level matches; IMO, they should just increase the number of refs / linesmen: add one more ref, and 2 more linesmen, 1 ref and linesmen in each half.

Favorites:
Spain
Brazil

Teams that could win it if everything goes right:
Argentina
England
France
Netherlands

Teams that could win it with a miracle:
Germany
Ivory Coast
Italy
Portugal

A number of the African teams could go far. Cameroon, Ghana, and Nigeria are all pretty solid I think.

The US and Mexico on their day could beat pretty much anyone so a string of good luck could see them to the semifinals, I guess. But I could also see them going three-and-out quite easily.

I have a hard time seeing any of the Asian countries getting past the round of 16.

Of the non big name European teams, I think Serbia might be the best with Denmark and Switzerland in the same area. But I have a hard time seeing any of them getting past the round of 16. You never know with matchups, but I think there's a pretty big gap separating the top 10 from most of the rest. Russia and Croatia both being out widens the gap quite a bit.

Any one of Chile, Paraguay, and Uruguay could do well, but I don't know enough about them to really pick one.

And then there's injuries. If Ronaldo gets hurt, Portugal could crash and burn. Well, actually, they still could even with him. I fear for England if they lose Rooney. If they get the slow and error-prone version of Ferdinand they could be in serious trouble, too. One of the big strengths of Spain, Brazil, France, and the Dutch is how deep their squads are.

Spain may have the two best strikers in the world, two of the 10 best keepers, and a midfield absolutely overflowing with riches. They could have three or four major injuries and still win it.

Their complete unwillingness to actually DO something about diving is also aggravating. Everyone went nuts when UEFA slapped a ban on Eduardo but I think that was mostly because it was arbitrary. If they *actually* instituted a policy where they set up a panel to go back and check the tapes after every match and punish diving, I think the fans would love it.

But why just diving? Why is diving anymore unacceptable than other forms of cheating, such as trying to undress an opponent because you are too slow and can't keep up with him?

Teams that could win it if everything goes right:
Argentina

Yeah, such as sacking Maradona.

For you guys in New York...next month my girl will be away for a couple of weeks so I think I'm going to go to Nevada Smith's early one Saturday and start drinking beer and watching games and see how long I can last. Let me know if anyone is interested in joining me.

Isn't this why they hired an Italian guy?

Yes, but it was also why they hired a Swedish guy.

For you guys in New York...next month my girl will be away for a couple of weeks so I think I'm going to go to Nevada Smith's early one Saturday and start drinking beer and watching games and see how long I can last. Let me know if anyone is interested in joining me.

I'm in.

Yes, but it was also why they hired a Swedish guy.

They had the right idea, they just got their countries mixed up. I remember reading an article in one of the big London rags after 2002 that the English team should hire Bruce Arena. Even as a know-nothing American, I thought that was hilarious.

I'm in.

Excellent. Someone to tell the taxi driver where I live when I'm passed out in the backseat!

#44 Maradona is doing a decent job of keeping himself out of the mix. (2 month touchline ban)

#44 Maradona is doing a decent job of keeping himself out of the mix. (2 month touchline ban)

FIFA is ok with handballs and diving, but you can not tell the media what they should and should not suck, evidently.

I love "Yankees catch break," as though the Yankees specifically are benefiting from the decision not to adopt further instant replay.

Yeah, such as sacking Maradona.

You could say a similar thing about the French and Domenech. They're not going anywhere as long as he's around. Of course, a lot of people said the same thing about Aime Jacquet, but he had Zidane and Domenech only has Gourcouff, who's not there yet as a world class playmaker.

Favorites:
Spain
Brazil

Teams that could win it if everything goes right:
Argentina
England
France
Netherlands

Teams that could win it with a miracle:
Germany
Ivory Coast
Italy
Portugal

A number of the African teams could go far. Cameroon, Ghana, and Nigeria are all pretty solid I think.

The US and Mexico on their day could beat pretty much anyone so a string of good luck could see them to the semifinals, I guess. But I could also see them going three-and-out quite easily.

I think almost any team can beat any team in soccer with a string of good luck (or bought off officals like the South Koreans did).

Without seeing the draw it's hard to tell, but at this point, if the US makes it out of the group stages I will be very surprised. Mexico too. CONCACAF is a terrible region.

Spain are clearly the best team in the world right now. Brazil are a good team, but not the creative juggernauts people seem to think they are (and they haven't been for 20 years). They're pretty similar to the 94 team (i.e. Dunga is their coach), good at the back, not great going forward. Lots of pace from the fullbacks. Big and strong players. Brazil will be boring in the World Cup, hopefully we won't have to listen to 90 minutes of Marcelo Balboa telling us how they "all play with a smile on their face," and that they "just play the game the right way."

England have big problems at the back because Ferdinand has lost it and Terry is losing it. They can still defend set pieces, but a striker with pace is going to cause them serious problems. I also think they're desperately thin up front. But they have a great coach for the first time in a long time, and because of Capello they are contenders.

The Dutch are coming along nicely, if van persie can get healthy they will be serious contenders too. Same with the Germans because, well, they're the Germans.

In the end, I think Spain wins and gets the monkey off its back. They're the best team.

And tough luck to Ireland. Now they can engage in their national pastime: whinging and drinking, not necessarily in that order. If the ref was worth his salt, Anelka gets a penalty. And the Irish have themselves to blame for blowing two chances to put the game away. And finally, if Henry is a cheat then so is Robbie Keane, who handled twice in the box earlier in the game.

All's fair in love and football.

It all depends on the draw (advancing, anyway). For fun:

POT 1-Brazil, Spain, Argentina, France, England, Italy, Germany, South Africa

POT 2- Netherlands, Portugal, Denmark, Slovenia, Greece, Slovakia, Serbia, Switzerland

POT 3- USA, Mexico, Honduras, South Korea, North Korea, Japan, Australia, New Zealand

POT 4- Paraguay, Uruguay, Chile, Ghana, Ivory Coast, Cameroon, Nigeria, Algeria

For USA, Best Case Scenario:

South Africa
Greece/Slovenia
USA
Not sure

Worst Case:

Brazil
Netherlands
USA
Ivory Coast

Median Case:
Italy
Denmark
USA
???

I think the USA would be slightly/somewhat favored to get out of a best case group, and an huge long shot to get out of a worst case group -- it'd have to be a couple any given Sunday situations. In the median case, I'd ballpark it as plausible but not probable.

Excellent. Someone to tell the taxi driver where I live when I'm passed out in the backseat!

I've only done the Nevada Smith's thing once--with Phil, of all people--but it is a pretty surreal experience. You stand there, drinking beer and watching football for hours, then you leave, all drunk and out-of-sorts and...it's daylight.

It was even more bizarre because it was right after I came back from London, so I really linked it mentally with drink, watch football, go to sleep. I was at ends for the rest of the day. Until I passed out, anyway.

I've only done the Nevada Smith's thing once--with Phil, of all people--but it is a pretty surreal experience. You stand there, drinking beer and watching football for hours, then you leave, all drunk and out-of-sorts and...it's daylight.

This sounds AWESOME!!!!!!!

Oh, and at least when I was there, they drew the shades, so it felt like night. And everyone was not only drinking, but eating meat pies. the whole thing was just a trip. I enjoyed it though. So pick a day and I'm in.

I've only done the Nevada Smith's thing once--with Phil, of all people--but it is a pretty surreal experience. You stand there, drinking beer and watching football for hours, then you leave, all drunk and out-of-sorts and...it's daylight.

It was even more bizarre because it was right after I came back from London, so I really linked it mentally with drink, watch football, go to sleep. I was at ends for the rest of the day. Until I passed out, anyway.

I don't often wish I lived anywhere other than SF, but this makes me wish I could pop over to NY for the weekend.

How about December 19th. Best to get this in before Christmas. Are there any decent games scheduled that day?

I think almost any team can beat any team in soccer with a string of good luck (or bought off officals like the South Koreans did).

Without seeing the draw it's hard to tell, but at this point, if the US makes it out of the group stages I will be very surprised. Mexico too. CONCACAF is a terrible region.

I guess I meant that the US and Mexico are good enough when all things are clicking right that they can credibly play up to the talent of most teams in the world. Anyone can beat anyone in a one-off game, but stringing together two or three 5% chance victories in a row is not going to happen (well, it happened once in Euro 2004 I guess).

The US and Mexico are better than that. They beat Spain in the Confederations Cup and it was totally legit. If they could have sustained their level of play for 45 more minutes, they would've beaten Brazil, too.

But they can also be just awful. The question is which you get.

Put the US and Switzerland in a group with, say, Brazil and North Korea. I would bet on Switzerland to make it out of the group, but if the US made it, I'd give them better odds at advancing past the second round.

How about December 19th. Best to get this in before Christmas. Are there any decent games scheduled that day?

I remember a couple years ago they had Super Sunday scheduled (Arse-Chelsea and Man Utd-Pool) scheduled for a couple weekends before Christmas. Might be worth seeing if they're doing that again and what weekend it is.

for us novices, (maybe I missed it in the thread) how is the 'draw' conducted? Ping Pong Balls? Giant index cards with bent corners? seriously?

Fixtures for 12/19:

Portsmouth v. Liverpool
Villa v. Stoke
Blackburn v. Spurs
Fulham v. Man U
City v. Sunderland
Arsenal v. Hull City

That works for me, date-wise.

Oh, and at least when I was there, they drew the shades, so it felt like night. And everyone was not only drinking, but eating meat pies. the whole thing was just a trip. I enjoyed it though. So pick a day and I'm in.

They always have the shades drawn, I think because they aren't technically allowed to serve alcohol that early in the morning.

I'd also be interested in this and 12/19 should work for me.

I was watching some of the youtube videos of the Henry play and I was utterly disgusted by the racism of Irish soccer fans.

Fulham - Man U. looks like the best game. Works for me. Too bad La Liga plays on Sunday.

Also, Spain and France, etc. are singular nouns. Stop with the "Spain are" nonsense. What is this, the BBC?

Also, Spain and France, etc. are singular nouns. Stop with the "Spain are" nonsense. What is this, the BBC?

The hell, man!

I was watching some of the youtube videos of the Henry play and I was utterly disgusted by the racism of Irish soccer fans.

In fairness to the Irish, they were probably drunk and stressed out from building bombs all day long.

In fairness to the Irish, they were probably drunk

probably?

probably?

I didn't want to be racist.

They always have the shades drawn, I think because they aren't technically allowed to serve alcohol that early in the morning.

Gasp! I'm out. I will not risk my professional reputation at some speakeasy committing an ABC violation.

for us novices, (maybe I missed it in the thread) how is the 'draw' conducted? Ping Pong Balls? Giant index cards with bent corners? seriously?

FIFA stacks the deck by arranging the countries into pots. The only pot that is actually known at this point is Pot 1, the pot for seeded countries, which I believe is set at this point. (My pot was purely for illustrative purposes.)

They then arrange the rest of the countries into more pots while trying to adhere to some matchup rules (along the lines of no more than three countries from the same confederation in a group).

Then they go spot by spot, ie. Group A, team 2, drawing from pot 8 or whatever, and they pull a ball out of a pot.

You could say a similar thing about the French and Domenech. They're not going anywhere as long as he's around. Of course, a lot of people said the same thing about Aime Jacquet, but he had Zidane and Domenech only has Gourcouff, who's not there yet as a world class playmaker.

I posted this in the lounge thread, but it shocked me quite a bit that in the three-and-a-half hours that Ireland and France played, Benzema didn't even see a minute. Is Gignac really so much better (or a better fit for the offense) that Benzema couldn't even get time as a late sub?

Regarding the U.S and their WC chances, a lot obviously depends on the draw. I think I'd be okay with sardonic's "median case" draw (with the stipulation that the fourth team is one of the 'lower tier' countries -- getting a cupcake their would be especially nice). It also depends on who the U.S. is strolling out there. Davies loss is pretty killer, but it'd suck even more if Onyewu can't heal up by then. A squad along the lines of-

Howard
Spector - Onyweu - Demerit/Boca - Boca/Cherundolo
Donovan - Jones - Bradley - Torres/Feilhaber/Holden
Dempsey - Altidore

-strikes me as a very good starting XI -- certainly not on par with the top teams but capable of making it out of group play and making some noise in the playoffs. But that's only if no more injuries are sustained in the next six months. I'm with sardonic in my appreciation for Donovan -- losing him would take away just about any chance the US has of making it out of group play.

I don't think Bradley is going to play Torres, or at least, he hasn't yet. Maybe the loss of Davies means that he'll keep Dempsey up front, where I think he's so much more useful, and opens up the midfield spot for Clark or Torres or Feilhaber.

If they lose Donovan, yeah, I think they're finished. But I think Dempsey's play is what could get the squad deeper. When he's playing well, they can turn in a pretty decent offensive performance.

I don't often wish I lived anywhere other than SF, but this makes me wish I could pop over to NY for the weekend

You realize there are a ton of places in Sf where this happens, just you're half in the bag by 9 am rather than noon, right?

I've only done the Nevada Smith's thing once--with Phil, of all people--but it is a pretty surreal experience. You stand there, drinking beer and watching football for hours, then you leave, all drunk and out-of-sorts and...it's daylight.

It was even more bizarre because it was right after I came back from London, so I really linked it mentally with drink, watch football, go to sleep. I was at ends for the rest of the day. Until I passed out, anyway.

I don't often wish I lived anywhere other than SF, but this makes me wish I could pop over to NY for the weekend.

Based on this description, and including the mention of meat pies, I must say that I'm strongly tempted to fly down to New York as well. I haven't had a good morning drunkening since I was still in school.

I don't think Bradley is going to play Torres, or at least, he hasn't yet. Maybe the loss of Davies means that he'll keep Dempsey up front, where I think he's so much more useful, and opens up the midfield spot for Clark or Torres or Feilhaber.

If they lose Donovan, yeah, I think they're finished. But I think Dempsey's play is what could get the squad deeper. When he's playing well, they can turn in a pretty decent offensive performance.

Yeah, I'm 90% sure that the plan is to move Dempsey up top and use Holden to replace him. Holden featured in that role during the Gold Cup when Bradley was testing out second teamers, played there against Denmark (Torres was excused).

Continuing my earlier post, the main other wrinkle could be Feilhaber on the wing instead of Holden. I'm not sure he has the workrate/speed/bite/whatever to cover opposing wingers down to the endline, but he did play there against Denmark, and his ability to play the left could allow you to push Donovan up, or play a more flexible formation where Donovan and Dempsey take turns up top.

A lot of it also depends on Jermaine Jones and Maurice Edu's collective health. I am not sold on Rico Clark in the middle at all.

Put the US and Switzerland in a group with, say, Brazil and North Korea. I would bet on Switzerland to make it out of the group, but if the US made it, I'd give them better odds at advancing past the second round.

Really? The Swiss looked thoroughly, thoroughly pedestrian at the Euros last summer. I think the US has come a long way in the last couple years. I'd bet on them making it out of any group that included Switzerland and a cannon fodder team.

Yeah, I'm 90% sure that the plan is to move Dempsey up top and use Holden to replace him. Holden featured in that role during the Gold Cup when Bradley was testing out second teamers, played there against Denmark (Torres was excused).

I'm likely asking you to repeat yourself (from past threads) here, but do you necessarily like that move? Holden seems to be pretty excellent at providing service from the wing into the box, but beyond that I haven't noticed much about him that's stood out. I'm just musing at Bradley's possible options. Is a healthy Maurice Edu good enough to play out wide? Or perhaps Jones or Bradley out wide (with Edu or someone else in the middle)?

At the very least, BB has a ton of options for the final two midfield spots (if you assume Bradley and Donovan or guarantees). There's Edu, Jones, Feilhaber, Torres, Holden and Clark (and hey, maybe even Beasley if he's able to get some PT and find his form at Rangers (who I thought I'd read are selling off their expensive parts)) who are all somewhat reasonable options.

How many players, again, are teams allowed to name to their WC squad? Putting names to spots will give me something to do in my mind-numbing accounting classes.

I'm probably heading to Freiburg this spring, but I'll probably spend a day or two across the border in France. How is that region of France? I've never been before.

I don't think anyone has answered this ...

I was just there this summer and spent 4 days or so in Alsace. It's lovely. It looks like what you'd expect to find in Switzerland/Austria rather than in France. The food is also a fantabulous sort of natural German/French fusion and is a major highlight. Every restaurant in the damn place advertises their versions of the traditional dishes.

Alsace is a plain but as you go west you hit the foothills of the Vosges mountains, which is also the wine region (rieslings and gewurtzes), dotted with unlimited adorable towns, neat castles and the like. You'd probably want to rent a car for that part, but I think it's the highlight.

I'm likely asking you to repeat yourself (from past threads) here, but do you necessarily like that move? Holden seems to be pretty excellent at providing service from the wing into the box, but beyond that I haven't noticed much about him that's stood out. I'm just musing at Bradley's possible options. Is a healthy Maurice Edu good enough to play out wide? Or perhaps Jones or Bradley out wide (with Edu or someone else in the middle)?

I like what I've seen from Holden. Sure, I'd rather have Dempsey out there and Davies up top, but all things considered, I'm satisfied enough with Holden out there. Where this really hurts us is depth, because I think there is more of a dropoff after Holden to Torres or Rogers than there is between Dempsey and Holden.

Here's what I like about him:

1) He's relatively skilled in terms of touch, vision, passing, making runs to get open, making himself available as an outlet. He's no Torres or Donovan, but I'd rate his general attacking skills as comparable to Dempsey's in areas other than finishing and 1v1. And he's superior to Demspey in terms of crossing/service. And he doesn't turn the ball over as much, and is much more active.

2) The edge he has over Torres, in my mind, is his workrate and physicality. Torres just looks like a small dude who isn't that fast to me. He has great touch, vision and passing skill, but I've also seen him shoved off the ball easily, and based more on what I've read, he doesn't have the stamina and workrate to track back as much. Holden, in the games I've seen him play, is much more active up and down his side, which the US needs in its game plan.

At the very least, BB has a ton of options for the final two midfield spots (if you assume Bradley and Donovan or guarantees). There's Edu, Jones, Feilhaber, Torres, Holden and Clark (and hey, maybe even Beasley if he's able to get some PT and find his form at Rangers (who I thought I'd read are selling off their expensive parts)) who are all somewhat reasonable options.

As for the other options, I'd rate the US attacking/wide midfield depth chart as follows:

Donovan
Dempsey*
Holden
...
Feilhaber
Rogers
...
...
Torres
Kljestan

*Dempsey will probably be a striker at this point

Bradley probably has the tools to play out wide, but he never has, and I doubt we'll ever see him there. I think we would switch systems before having Bradley play the role that Donovan and Dempsey have, and Holden and Feilhaber could.

Edu is not nearly skilled enough to play there. His touch is pretty bad, and his passing is limited for even a defensive/central midfielder (though when he played CB for the U20s I felt like his distribution out of the back was an asset, though obviously at the U20 level CBs are given much more space). His game is all about imposing his physical will. The only high level DM/CMs who can play a credible outside back are guys like Essien and Hargreaves. And Edu is no Essien or Hargreaves. The same applies to Clark.

As for Benny, he's been tried out there, and he has the skill. Not sure about his defensive abilities and workrate, but he does appear to be the most suited of our CMs to move out there, and has been played there. So he's next in line. Though that weakens our CM depth.

How many players, again, are teams allowed to name to their WC squad? Putting names to spots will give me something to do in my mind-numbing accounting classes.

23 spots, which must include 3 GK. I haven't done a provisional roster in a while, but here's a quick stab at what I predict Bob will do:


-----------Altidore--Dempsey---------------
-----Donovan-------------Holden---
----------Bradley-------Jones-------------
--Castillo--Bocanegra--Onyewu--Spector-----
------------Howard-------------------------

Backup strikers: Conor Casey, Kenny Cooper
Backup Attacking/Wide MF: Robbie Rogers, Benny Feilhaber
Backup CM: Maurice Edu, Ricardo Clark
Backup D: Jonathan Bornstein (LB), Chad Marshall (CB), Steve Cherundolo (RB), Jay DeMerit (CB)
Backup GK: Brad Guzan, Marcus Hahnemann/who cares

This is obviously highly speculative, especially with Jones (health + form + never played with US), but hopefully he'll be healthy enough to participate in January Camp. Castillo has at least gotten a look, and I hate Bornstein so much that I can't imagine him starting for us. I don't know that much about Castillo though, and haven't watched the Denmark tape yet.

Edu and Onyewu are also currently hurt, but should be back, and have been in the system enough that they should be fine.

We could really use Jones though, because as the Denmark and Slovakia games have shown, we're thin enough as it is.

I am excited that the Winter Olympics are in Vancouver this year. I will not have to get up at 5am to watch the gold medal hockey game, like I did last time around.

I am not excited about the 8 hour time difference between Chicago & South Africa. I am guessing this means a lot of 5am-11am start times for the games?

I am not excited about the 8 hour time difference between Chicago & South Africa. I am guessing this means a lot of 5am-11am start times for the games?

Well, South Africa is almost at the same longitude as Germany, and the times in Germany for the West Coast were quite reasonable, mostly 9am and 12pm, as I recall. Though I was a student at the time, and as such had quite a bit more flexibility.

I imagine a lot of the games will be on ESPN360 as well, and since I'll likely be working on at least one World Cup related product next summer...

I'm looking forward to seeing Jones and Castillo suit up. Especially Jones because the US midfield play really bugs the hell out of me.

There is not a clear answer to this. The rulebook definitely states that if you are in an offside position when the ball is played and you are materially involved in the play then it should be involved. But it's ultimately up to each individual ref where the line should actually be drawn.

For instance, someone standing in offside position directly in front of the keeper blocking his line of sight is clearly offside. Someone standing in offside position on the sideline fixing his laces is clearly not. In between...it's debatable.

Dude, thanks. Because that has been driving me *nuts* in FIFA 10 for PC. I thought I had the rule down pat after having to look it up. But then obviously a bunch of calls weren't made even though a guy away from the play was offside. So I figured it was only an offense if he was offside and he was the one who next touched the ball. But then I noticed some exceptions to that, where it was called even when the guy offside wasn't the next toucher, so I just freaking gave up.

One thing I didn't get until just now is that there is a difference between being offside and committing an offside offence.

I found this post by an Irish fella who made the trip to France to be rather poignant:

"The country is silent today. There's a soft rain that has been falling all over the country for hours and it seems apt. Better for people to be worrying about potential flooding and other practical things than about a silly football match in France.

But this country is in the direst economic crisis it has ever faced - unemployment rocketing, national finances in ribbons, house repossessions at record levels, and our young people now forced to emigrate again just like the bad old days.
In such times, pride is a powerful thing. That pride soared against Italy, when we came within just a couple of minutes of beating them and topping the group. It soared in Croke Park last Saturday as we kept the French at bay until a ferociously lucky Anelka goal (deflections off defender and post) burst the bubble.
And finally, gloriously, in Paris, it seemed that even if we went on to lose that match in the end, we had still restored something about Irish pride, our collective sense of character and resolve, of staring into an abyss and climbing out together.

And with that travesty last night we were flung back into that abyss, this time deeper than before.

That's how much this means over here.

I'm still gutted.

We all are.

At the final whistle, we booed and clapped almost at the same time, torn between showing our derision for the officials and our pride for the efforts of our men in green and white.

As we made our way back into the city, the French fans had the dignity to leave quietly. There were no renditions of their anthem and anyone trying to start a chorus of "Allez les Bleus" was quickly shushed out by their compatriots.

They knew that a great injustice had been done.

We sat and stood in French bars and cafes long into the night, still not having seen a single replay but hoping in our hearts that it really wasn't as bad as our friends and family at home were saying. There was no talk, no craic, just the same shellshocked look on every fan's face until, in small groups, we would wend our way back to hotels and hostels to go to sleep. Perhaps we would wake up and it would all have been a bad dream.

On our way home, twice we encountered French fans who apologised for the goal and genuinely seemed ashamed at the manner of their victory.

We thanked them, and wished them good luck in South Africa."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/8370497.stm

Howie, that is a pheonomenal post.

I think my favorite thing of the year, perhaps the entire decade/millennium so far is that (I just noticed) the volume control on the BBC video player goes to 11.

Why don't England, Scotland, the occupied part of Ireland and Wales just make one team? They could kick ass.

anyone watching man city v liverpool

Holy crap, what a game

Why don't England, Scotland, the occupied part of Ireland and Wales just make one team? They could kick ass.

Wouldn't that just be England? How many Scottish etc. players would crack the top 11?

anyone watching man city v liverpool

HOLY CRAP! IT'S RAINING GOALS!

I have no idea, just seems like it would be an advantage.

Man City scored an equalizer in 11 seconds after going down 2-1.

How do tv stations make money on soccer? Where do you put the ads?

No extra time? boo