|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Jun 15, 2006 0:19:07 GMT -5
It's cause they do the same routine every year. They're always high-scoring, having now scored 3+ goals in their last five group phase games. But there's always some muck up somewhere--they escaped without harm in the prelims in 2002, but in 1998 there was the loss to Nigeria and scoreless draw against Paraguay before demolishing Bulgaria 6-1 in a completely meaningless game--third in a group as a top seed counts as underachieving. Since U.S. sports analogies are en vogue this year in the World Cup, I'd say Spain is like the Georgetown Lacrosse of international soccer. The talent is unquestionably there, but (as one of the announcers very pointedly put it today during the game), there's an upper-tier of truly elite world soccer teams, and Spain is right below it in that next tier. And there's always the potential to get to that elite level, but they can never pull it off like many in the world think they can/should. Fittingly for this analogy, the last two times Spain cleared the group phase in a World Cup, they lost in the quarterfinals in heartbreaking fashion--to penalty kicks against S. Korea in 2002, and to a GW goal in the 88th minute from Italy in 1994. In 1990, they lost in the Round of 16 in extra time. Sure, 1998 and 1994 were disappointing. But are they in any way predictors of what the 2006 Spain squad can do? I hope we're not going to analyze the US based on 1994 -- if we did what label would we use? My point is that Spain did this in 2002: Beat Slovenia 3-1 Beat Paraguay 3-1 Beat South Africa 3-2 Beat Ireland on Penalty kicks Lost to South Korea on penalty kicks after two Spanish goals were disallowed. It should be no secret by now I think Spain outplayed Korea in their match and but for the refs would have won the game. Considering Spain hadn't lost up to that point in 2002 I think it is misleading to call Spain's 2002 campaign a disappointment -- I would call it a good run unfairly cut short. Yet here we are in 2006 and every media outlet on the globe is referring to 2002 as yet another disappointing year where Spain couldn't move past the quarterfinals. In your "I just googled Spain World Cup results" response above you seem to suggest the same. I fully expect Spain to build on the success of 2002 and finally move past the quarterfinals in 2006. If that doesn't happen I might eat my words and agree with the unqualified, uninformed media characterization of Spain as a "perennial underachiever" or "disappointment" that you are simply repeating in this thread. But I'm pretty sure they'll roll their way into the semis. Dios mio, man.
|
|
FLHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Proud Member of Generation Burton
Posts: 4,544
|
Post by FLHoya on Jun 15, 2006 0:54:56 GMT -5
Sure, 1998 and 1994 were disappointing. But are they in any way predictors of what the 2006 Spain squad can do? I hope we're not going to analyze the US based on 1994 -- if we did what label would we use? See this is the problem with the World Cup--you get a 3-5 game sample every 4 years. I'll give you that. I think Spain shows enough consistency recently in being a high scoring team in "lesser" games (the 6-1 win that didn't matter in 1998, the prelims in 2002) and fading as the tournament goes on--a 1-1 game in the Round of 16 and then the 2-0 "scoreless tie" in the Quarterfinals in 2002 to at least make that point though. It causes enough angst that my best friend from GU, whose family is from Spain, was going through his whole "post-first Spain game euphoria" theory with me tonight, claiming that it's usually downhill from here. Yet here we are in 2006 and every media outlet on the globe is referring to 2002 as yet another disappointing year where Spain couldn't move past the quarterfinals. Commentators do stuff like that. I'm not a Spain-hater, I'm actually a Spain-liker . They are very talented, fun to watch, etc. But unfortunately they do have this thing hanging over them that they've stalled around the quarterfinals a lot. Luck plays a role in these sorts of things for sure--whether it's a referee crew on acid and fickle PKs or an ill-timed offsides violation that gives Syracuse the ball back that they convert into a GW goal in the final seconds to go to the Lax Final Four. I think the 2002 Quarterfinal is admittedly a whacked-out case to judge Spain by, and I certainly don't hold that against them. What I would say, and it alludes to what I said above and what my point actually is here... ...is that when I say Spain "underachieves" it has to do with there being a drop-off in quality between their preliminary round games and their playoff round games. That's a combo of not as much scoring and not as much skill shown on the field. They didn't play as well against Ireland in that Round of 16 game as they had in any prelim game...regardless of the score (and I am almost positive without Googling this one that Ireland had some questionable penalty kick go their way in that game.) In your "I just googled Spain World Cup results" response above you seem to suggest the same. HEY! I used Wikipedia, thank you very much! ;D If that doesn't happen I might eat my words and agree with the unqualified, uninformed media characterization of Spain as a "perennial underachiever" or "disappointment" that you are simply repeating in this thread. But I'm pretty sure they'll roll their way into the semis. 1. If you read my posts in the soccer threads, you will be well aware that I listen to the media purely for comedic purposes. 2. I am rooting hard for Spain to pull off a run to the semifinals, because if they do, they're probably gonna have to beat Brazil* in the quarters to get there.** (*Of course, I'd rather the USA find a way to get into the Round of 16 against Brazil and do it our own damn selves, but more pressing issues like beating Italy, scoring goals, and running an actual offense come first). (**I looked that up on the schedule I have on my fridge.) On a side note, I have no idea what you're reasoning is for hopping on the Defend Spain Against the Evil Media Misconception Bandwagon, but I like it!
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Jun 15, 2006 6:28:23 GMT -5
I'm sorry but until they prove otherwise i'll continue to think of the iberian peninsula as a bunch of under achievers and the curse seems to have spread to france after their 98 cup win they haven't scored a goal.
|
|
|
Post by StPetersburgHoya (Inactive) on Jun 15, 2006 7:25:52 GMT -5
After watching the Spain vs. Urkaine game on DVR I have only this to say - "Ukraine is not weak!"
|
|
FLHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Proud Member of Generation Burton
Posts: 4,544
|
Post by FLHoya on Jun 15, 2006 9:53:15 GMT -5
Aaaaaaaannnnndddd...unless I'm halucinating, Ivan Kaviedes of Ecuador just celebrated a goal by taking a lucha libre-style mask out of his pants and putting it on. I was just thinking about how one thing missing from sports is more lucha libre masks.
|
|
SEAHoya
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 126
|
Post by SEAHoya on Jun 15, 2006 13:13:23 GMT -5
So, we are treated to Kaviedes' Lucha Libre mask, then (at least here on ITV in the UK) poor old Dwight Yorke massaging the family jewels after blocking a shot with them... Ouch. What will the Swedes/Paraguayans come up with to top that?
|
|
|
Post by Nitrorebel on Jun 15, 2006 14:24:33 GMT -5
For whatever reason, the same things happen every time at the major football tournaments. The same countries over-perform, go far; the same countries under-perform, get eliminated. It's almost like voodoo.
Brazil, Germany, Argentina, and Italy ALWAYS do better at World Cups, Euros, etc.
England, Holland, and Spain ALWAYS under-achieve and get knocked out, often because they did something utterly stupid like get a red card or miss a penalty.
The first bunch have the killer-instinct and just know how to win even if they have an off day or have a bad team in general.
The second bunch always know how to shoot themselves in the foot sooner or later.
It's really uncanny. There are exceptions to this rule, but basically they just confirm the rule. Germany in 2002 had a CRAP team with only 2 world-class players in Kahn and Ballack, who was hurt and only at 75% for the tournament. 6 games without conceding a goal later they're in the final...
France is completely up and down with excellent tournaments, and inexplicable ones (2002 anyone?). Czech Republic lacks the body of work, but is looking it may be added to the first bunch in a few more years. At least one of the smaller Latin American teams and Mexico tend to be better than expected. See Ecuador this year.
|
|
SFOHoya
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 501
|
Post by SFOHoya on Jun 15, 2006 18:39:04 GMT -5
Shep Messing... worst color man in any sport ever televised
What he brings to the table: OH BABY, UNBELIEVABLE, WOW!
|
|
SFOHoya
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 501
|
Post by SFOHoya on Jun 15, 2006 20:02:31 GMT -5
Aaaaaaaannnnndddd...unless I'm halucinating, Ivan Kaviedes of Ecuador just celebrated a goal by taking a lucha libre-style mask out of his pants and putting it on. I was just thinking about how one thing missing from sports is more lucha libre masks. T.O eat your heart out. For visual confirmation... tinyurl.com/lv382
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Jun 16, 2006 13:21:04 GMT -5
Wow two very exciting matches today. Argentina absolutely dominated. Some beautiful football. And the Dutch Ivory Coast game was also amazing one of the most competitive thus far. It's a shame that Cote De Ivoire is eliminated they looked very good it sucks they were in such a hard group.
|
|
|
Post by StPetersburgHoya (Inactive) on Jun 16, 2006 14:18:53 GMT -5
Angola and Mexico game is underway.
Let's go Angola, Let's go. clap-clap (x3).
|
|
|
Post by Nitrorebel on Jun 16, 2006 16:20:37 GMT -5
Argentina have got to be one of the top faves. That was one of the best performances I can remember at a World Cup. Every goal was beautiful. And the disallowed one wasn't offside either!!! That group was easily the hardest. Any of those 4 teams would have made it in Germany's or France's group. Sucks that Cote d'Ivoire is out. But even Serbia was one of the most impressive teams in qualifying. Tough group.
England was so embarrassing y'day and it's not even funny. Watching them play is painful.
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Jun 16, 2006 16:26:00 GMT -5
And Mexico and Angola play to a draw. It's still virtually impossible for Mexico not to advance (they have to lose to Portugal and Angola must beat Iran by 4 for it to happen), but they were expected to dominate this bracket. Some of the loudest boos I have heard during this year's Cup came from the ever-classy Mexican fans following the final whistle.
|
|
CAHoya07
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,598
|
Post by CAHoya07 on Jun 16, 2006 21:57:05 GMT -5
Gotta be disappointing for the Mexicans. If they really think they can win the whole thing, they have to beat teams like Angola. Still in pretty good shape to advance, however.
Let's see what Team USA can do tomorrow. I think the beginning of the match will be key to quickly exorcise the demons of the Czech game. Of course after Monday, any goal would be appreciated, but an early goal would go a long way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2006 11:20:22 GMT -5
GHANA!!! (CLAP-CLAP) GHANA!!! (CLAP-CLAP) GHANA!!! (CLAP-CLAP) GHANA!!! (CLAP-CLAP)
Now if only they can manage a couple more...
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Jun 19, 2006 16:45:41 GMT -5
Entertaining game this afternoon between España and Tunisia, with some inspired defense for most of the game by the Africans. Good to see Raúl score -- he didn't do much against Ukraine and had been pretty invisible between getting subbed in and scoring. He played much better after the first Spanish goal and hopefully that lift continues throughout the tournament.
Before the match Brent Musberger presided over a fascinating piece of journalism which repeated ABC/ESPN's tired Spain Is a Disapointment mantra. Brent did not apparently see the need to go to the trouble of examining any of Spain's recent World Cup results as FL did above -- it was enough to mention "they haven't done much" and state that "Spain has only made it to the semifinals once, in 1950." Brent, some research would be appreciated. GFE, ya know.
I will admit, as before, that Spain has been disappointing over the past couple decades. But as Nitro's list points out, there are plenty of other countries on which the underachiever label can be hung. Why is England not subjected to the same hack job? Why does every sentence about the French side begin with "France, winners in 1998..." I just want to enjoy El Niño's goals without having to throw up in my mouth every time ESPN sends it back to Dave Revsine in the studio. Thank God Smythe covered the game today -- he actually points out the good things Spain does/has done recently to balance out the other ESPN mierda. I will shut up now.
|
|
|
Post by Nitrorebel on Jun 19, 2006 18:02:12 GMT -5
This World Cup has been pretty unbelievable so far. Very few crap games - esp when you discount the England games, hehehe. 2002 was a terrible World Cup overall, and it's good to see this one be so excellent. Reasons IMO: - 2002 started right after the Euro seasons ended. Most of the top players were injured or not 100%, e.g. Zidane and Ballack. FIFA kept a big gap this year, and it's paid off big-time: players are fit and rested. - Location: Japan/SK was unfamiliar territory for most teams and players. Not that many fans traveled with their teams coz of the location. The stadiums are small, and there was the whole sponsors getting 30-40% of tix nonsense. Germany is a great location, because slam in the middle of Europe. Also easier to reach for fans from Africa, and not too bad for Latin America, tho Asia gets shafted. Germany is relatively small and compact, and intra-country travel means lots of fans can follow their team around without outrageous travel costs. The atmospheres have been amazing, and my mates in Munich are saying the cities are booming with World Cup fever. Everyone's having a great time.
Lots of goals, and attacking play. I'm also very happy to see that defensive-minded teams playing for ties, or trying to hold 1-0 leads for entire games are being punished by losing. It's good to see offensive-minded teams being rewarded for their effort and persistence.
Teams that will go far: Argentina, Brazil, Germany. Still not sold on: Spain (I know, I know), England (playing like crap, and Rooney is not Pele even when he is 100%. The whining here is ridiculous: the weather (they won't shut up about the heat), Rooney's metatersal, the ref. Boo-friggin-hoo. Play and win or shut up and go home.) Possibility to surprise: Holland (they could make the final or lose in the 2nd round) Unlucky: Ivory Coast (that group is sick. IC would've made it from almost any other group)
|
|
FLHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Proud Member of Generation Burton
Posts: 4,544
|
Post by FLHoya on Jun 19, 2006 19:48:54 GMT -5
Before the match Brent Musberger presided over a fascinating piece of journalism which repeated ABC/ESPN's tired Spain Is a Disapointment mantra. Brent did not apparently see the need to go to the trouble of examining any of Spain's recent World Cup results as FL did above -- it was enough to mention "they haven't done much" and state that "Spain has only made it to the semifinals once, in 1950." Brent, some research would be appreciated. GFE, ya know. I will admit, as before, that Spain has been disappointing over the past couple decades. But as Nitro's list points out, there are plenty of other countries on which the underachiever label can be hung. Why is England not subjected to the same hack job? Why does every sentence about the French side begin with "France, winners in 1998..." I just want to enjoy El Niño's goals without having to throw up in my mouth every time ESPN sends it back to Dave Revsine in the studio. Thank God Smythe covered the game today -- he actually points out the good things Spain does/has done recently to balance out the other ESPN mierda. I will shut up now. The only thing I can think of is that both England and France have won World Cups before, even if it's been 40 years for England and France's is starting to look more and more like the greatest home-court advantage aberration ever. So they're "story"...and there's plenty of "angst" stories about England and "wow, they really can't score can they?" stuff about France...at least has that one line in it about winning a World Cup. Spain meanwhile gets stuck with the "lots of talent, lots of scoring, no title" storyline. One of the other random storylines ESPN annoyed me with was the constant Ronaldinho hype. He's good and all (*mild understatement), but it was totally done with this, "okay, you dumb Americans don't know anything about soccer" tone to it that tried to play the Tiger Woods x Michael Jordan card and kinda weirded me out. Probably played a little revisionist history on his goal vs. England in the 2002 Quarterfinals too...turning it into Ronaldinho scores a spectacular, amazing free kick, when at the time (maybe I read too many English papers during the WC) the storyline was who was first in line to hang David Seaman by his ponytail for authoring England's quadrennial WC brain fart.
|
|
JimmyHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Hoya fan, est. 1986
Posts: 1,867
|
Post by JimmyHoya on Jun 21, 2006 13:04:29 GMT -5
I'd just like to say one thing:
The notion that USA soccer will somehow take a step back in popularity because we don't advance is sad and the exact problem with the culture here in the United States. The fact that we need a win to get all the posers to watch is why it will never be popular.
It isn't a glamorous sport. You can't play pickup soccer in the cities (which are the only places that matter). And you will never, ever be able to make people in a diverse country like this that a tournement that occurs only every four years and hosts as many non-American fans as American ones that it is "important."
It's a sideshow. Discuss.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2006 15:40:07 GMT -5
I'd just like to say one thing: The notion that USA soccer will somehow take a step back in popularity because we don't advance is sad and the exact problem with the culture here in the United States. The fact that we need a win to get all the posers to watch is why it will never be popular. It isn't a glamorous sport. You can't play pickup soccer in the cities (which are the only places that matter). And you will never, ever be able to make people in a diverse country like this that a tournement that occurs only every four years and hosts as many non-American fans as American ones that it is "important." It's a sideshow. Discuss. Winning plays a part, yes. I'm sure if the US advanced and maybe even made it to the finals, let alone win the whole freakin' thing, people might get more interested in the game back at home. If the US had won the gold medal in hockey at this year's Winter Olympics, I'm sure NHL ratings (while better than the Stanley Cup in 2004) would have been much better. But I'm not sure if winning has as much to do with it as what people actually see when it comes to the game at its highest level. On the one hand, as many kids play soccer as any other little league sport in America for whatever reason (parents don't want their kids getting hurt playing football, "embarrassed" by striking out in baseball). And yet unlike these sports, that hasn't translated into nationwide popularity. Granted, most of those kids who play when they're little have given it up by high school, but the fact remains: they have a familiarity with the sport, have played it, and yet choose not to watch or invest emotionally in the national league/national team. More so than "America sucks, why should I watch?" I think soccer's problem is what people see when they DO watch. Every World Cup for as long as I can remember, my father, my cousins, friends... lots of people I know watch the matches, mostly because I'm into international soccer competitions and force them too. And every four years, most of them quit watching because they tell me they see the same things over and over: inconsistent officiating bordering on WWF incompetence; players faking injuries to get calls; slow, low-scoring games... things that are very "un-American" when it comes to sports. Don't get me wrong, I can understand the "baseball is slow" or "football has too many stoppages" arguments completely. Hell, even hockey and basketball fell from grace (to varying degrees) because the games became too slow, clutch-and-grab and low scoring. But these leagues persist, buildings are sold out, fans come back after strikes... ... and I think the difference is that when the sport of soccer puts its "best foot forward" with the World Cup and people try and give it a chance, they see the same things over and over and it turns them off, whether right or wrong. After a while it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. It would be like introducing someone to the NHL in 2001 and trying to get them excited about hockey. Or the NBA around the same time. The product simply wasn't enjoyable at the time. Only with soccer, you get a shot once every four years to make that pitch, whereas the other sports can keep coming back at you season after season. These ARE the best players, and these generally ARE the best matches in the World Cup... but the things people don't like, they will see in spades, and the fact it isn't happening in some regular season game somewhere between two club teams, but between the 32 best teams in the world - AND THE FACT TEAMS GET REWARDED FOR THESE FAULTS - drives the people I know who try and get into it away.
|
|