Seeing Red, or Playing a Man Down:

Let's face it, soccer is a much better game to watch when both teams are trying to play some offense. Sure, it's easier to play the counter game; you can win with far lesser talent that delivers in a timely fashion (see Greece, 2004, Italy 1982), but it's a bummer to watch. And that's why Germany has been a genuine revelation this Cup, why England continues to disappoint, and Argentina and Brazil (finally, against Japan) have been scintillating.

And Australia, as well, who have thrown folks forward and shown a real no-fear approach to playing. It was great, early in the game, when they were playing with great aggressiveness. Contrast that to the U.S. approach in the Ghana game....

But as much as I was rooting for the socceroos, I found my desire for them dip immensely, though through little effort of their own. The Straight Red to Materazzi was simply a bad call. Not a breakaway, not a violent foul, certainly deserving a yellow, but the difference between red and yellow is huge. Red is justified in the ugliest of fouls, for violence or for clear and obvious denial of a undeniably 1-1. Maradona's Red in 1990, where he simply started walking off before he was even given the red, for example. Portuguese fans (and others) argue that Bouhlarouz deserved it for the "hit" on Christiano Ronaldo, and one could not have really complained if it were the case. Di Rossi and Mastroeni both deserved Reds, the former for elbowing without even trying to head, and the latter for double studs up tackling. I absolutely support the Straight Red to deter injury. But beyond that, it's got to be pretty awful, and Metarazzi's foul didn't measure up.

At which point, a strange thing overcame me: I started pulling for the Italians. Their boring game became cagey. Cannavaro continued to show his undeniable excellence. And most of all, Australia, for all its balls out hustle, did not drive the Italians into the ground. Sure, it was hot, but it seemed that the approach was more "we'll beat them some time in extra time, after they've really wilted." Uninspired. Italy had the better chances late, despite the sweet Sugarfield spin and shot, and Totti's spark and power were obvious. The foul, well, a guy slides in the box, the attackes goes over him and is upset; what can you really expect? He could have avoided him with some effort, I'd imagine, but it's not a dive, in my opinion. It was perfectly easy to be tripped. And so it was.

I would have hated the outcome had the game been 11-11. At 10-11, it seemed just.

What a sorry group: Italy, Austraiia, and the ho-hum specialists, Switzerland and Ukraine. Compare to Argentina, Mexico, Germany, Sweden....The pairings ban be quite bizarre.

Let's hope for better things tomorrow. Part of me wants Spain to win, as France hardly look worthy of advancing, but I'd like to see Henry torch Aragones, for Henry is by my regards an amazing striker, one whose fitness is clearly superior to most of the superstars who sit and sit and sit. It should be fun.

Dutch Ego:

A recurring theme, unfortunately, for I like the Dutch (they were scintillating in '98), but this team never had a team feel. There was a constant "why didn't you pass the ball to me" gesture from the whole front line, especially the talented Mr. Van Persie, who looks a lot like his namesake, Robin the Boy Wonder (just imagine him with Robin's mask!) Contrast that with the obvious warmth that Argentina, Brazil, Portugal, Germany, and Spain have for each other. They have more talent but don't seem to be able to share the limelight better. Too bad for the Dutch; they coulda been a contender.

Salcido best left back? Lahm has shown some cheeky moves, and deserves consideration. Sorin plays too much up front to really be considered a left back by my lights. The kid from Mexico was never beaten; everything good came down the left (other) side for Argentina.

It's awfully hard to find good outside backs. I haven't seen a good British one in my life. Neville and Cole are gritty, but not much beyond that. No one beats Maldini in my book. Roberto Carlos and Cafu in their prime were great, but I don't see them in that quality any more.

A good outside back is hard to find.

One-footed wonders:

Both of the wonderboys are one-footed, almost like bookends of each other. Messi has no right foot, and Tevez no left (and hence no shot and getting stripped by Osario when he essentially had a clear 1-1 with the keeper from 12 feet out.) Yeah, I know, Maradona had no right and Cruyff not much of a left, but it is awfully perplexing. Ballack, on the other hand, is so damn fluid from either side. It's not that hard to get pretty good with one's off-foot, but I guess with Messi or Maradona, what's the point when no one can stop you?

Why play Saviola? Sure, the kids are kids, but who would you rather guard? Saviola's a perfectly nice player, but he's a little guy, so why not play better little guys?

How many times will Tevez beat his man with the outside of the foot nutmeg?

Is it really so bad to have two playmakers, particularly if you're going to look to play to the feet of Messi and Tevez?