Jul 28

Hysterical overreaction is as much a part of the Internet as inappropriate photos and conspiracy theories.

Given that, I’m a little surprised I haven’t heard today from the dude who kept Tweeting at me last week about MLS “fixing” games by playing reserves in the second half … of friendlies. Oh no, it couldn’t be a prudent decision to rest starters and give reserves some experience in a game that won’t count in the standings. It’s a crime.

The Internet is noisy. After any event that draws hype, many people will sound off. And just as the UFC survives to fight another day when a main event is disappointing, so too will MLS survive a round of friendlies in which European elites have basically wiped the field with indifferent, inexperienced or inferior teams.

All that said, MLS fans and the blogopundits are well within their rights to look at last night’s game and ask whether the league has any players capable of hitting the broad side of a barn from the penalty spot.

The league has already set a record for scoreless ties, and it’s not even August, as Steve Davis laments in a sound analysis. Then last night, the MLS All-Stars laid a goose egg.

Yes, Manchester United is one of the world’s best teams, and yes, they’re clearly taking this U.S. tour more seriously than many teams have taken it in the past. Their attacking flair was brilliant last night, and it’s hard to begrudge an All-Star team that never practices together the four goals it conceded to Rooney, Berbatov et al.

Yet United gave the All-Stars plenty of space, appropriately enough for a friendly. No one’s getting “stuck in” on a challenge in a game like this. (Jamison Olave left with an injury, but it wasn’t caused by contact.) The All-Stars, though unfamiliar with each other, completed 86% of their passes and managed 13 shots, two more than a well-oiled Man U machine. Goals? Zero. And it’s not as if Man U’s two keepers had to dig deep to keep the All-Stars at bay.

Can we prove anything from one game? No. Is it one more sad piece of evidence to the well-supported theory that MLS players can knock the ball around all day, just as they do in those ubiquitous possession drills, but can’t put the ball in the net? Certainly looks that way.

And fans have every right to say, while supporting the league in near-record numbers, that GMs should be looking for goal-scorers and coaches should be devoting a bit more time to finishing drills rather than possession exercises.

That’s not an overreaction to one game. The All-Star Game isn’t even the last straw. It’s just a well-publicized example of a legitimate problem. The result – Manchester United winning — doesn’t matter. Overreacting to the game is silly. Reacting is not.

Tagged with:
Jul 19

Let’s rewrite history, shall we?

1. 1988 World Series: The Oakland A’s choked in Game 1, when Dennis Eckerley got out to an 0-2 count with two out in the ninth and a 4-3 lead but hung a slider that Kirk Gibson, so hobbled he might have been thrown out from left field, hit for a home run. (Sure, Nate Silver lists this as a choke in passing, but we remember Gibson in that situation much more clearly than we remember Eckersley. Silver also points out the ugly aftermath of living with a “choke” — Donnie Moore’s 1989 suicide.)

2. 1982 NCAA Championship: Georgetown gave away the national men’s basketball championship when Fred Brown passed the ball straight to North Carolina’s James Worthy. Oh yeah — some guy named Michael Jordan hit a big shot before that, a shot that some report today as a “buzzer-beater” even though it hit the net with 15 seconds left.

3. 2010 World Cup: Oh boy, did Slovenia and Algeria choke!

Get the picture?

Frankly, “choke” is a term that doesn’t interest me, mostly because I associate it with insecure guys trying to exert some sort of power over the sports they watch. It’s a word for the keyboard warrior and frustrated fan, and it’s not applied with any sort of consistency to either gender or any sport. If you think it doesn’t apply to women, talk to Daniela Hantuchova.

“Choke” is sometimes used as a way of distancing ourselves emotionally from a loss that would otherwise be painful. Our college hoops team lost? Oh, they choked. Our baseball team blew a 5-game lead in September? Choke! Scott Norwood missed a difficult 47-yard field goal — or a “chip shot” in the words of revisionists — that would’ve spared the Buffalo Bills the indignity of being perennial runners-up? Choke!

So in a weird way, yelling “choke!” is just a way of saying you care. Thanks?

Tagged with:
Apr 11

A message came in over Twitter from a private feed (I’ll identify him if he likes), asking a good question: “Why on earth do you engage with complete morons?”

This was in response to last night’s Twitter fight, in which I was arguing with two guys with a combined Twitter followership of less than 50 people about the incident at yesterday’s Masters in which Bergen Record columnist Tara Sullivan was denied entry into the locker room.

No one credible is jumping to say Sullivan shouldn’t have been in the locker room. Her male colleagues rallied to share quotes with her. Augusta National very quickly apologized and pinned the blame on a misinformed security guard.

Don’t confuse the Sullivan case with the question of whether the locker room should be open in the first place. That’s a legitimate question, raised recently by Toronto FC’s Aron Winter. The norm in other countries and many smaller-scale U.S. leagues (including Women’s Professional Soccer) is to keep the locker room closed but make athletes available for interviews in a timely fashion. Some sports handle it better than others, of course. But if the powers that be have decided that the most expedient way to handle interviews is to open the locker room, then barring women at the door is an impediment to their jobs.

As my buddy hoover_dam said: “Either you let everyone in or you do a mixed zone where you let nobody in. Get with it, ya jerks.”

Continue reading »

Tagged with:
Mar 30

Gender equity has become one of those topics about which it’s nearly impossible to have a rational discussion.

If you see the last discussion I had on this topic, you can get a sense of my frustration. Legitimate points are there to be made — sports programs are getting cut, and while Title IX may sometimes be a convenient scapegoat, it’s hard to ignore that complying with Title IX can be messy or even counterproductive.

The examples I always use are Georgia Tech and North Carolina. The latter could easily be a victim of its success if it were ever seriously pressed to meet “Prong 1″ of the Title IX test, proportionality (tying athletic opportunities to the gender ratio of the student body). In reading The Man Watching, the biography of Carolina women’s soccer coach Anson Dorrance, you can trace Chapel Hill’s history from an overwhelmingly male student body to a 60-40 female ratio as, only partly coincidentally, it gets serious about women’s sports. Georgia Tech is still puttering along with a 64% male student body. Guess who has no trouble meeting the proportionality prong. Why use this law, which was supposed to be about educational opportunities and not just sports, to make things difficult on the university that has become a haven, if not heaven, for female students and student-athletes while not using it to encourage more women to go to schools like Georgia Tech?

Continue reading »

Tagged with:
Oct 19

Happened across (via a former Duke roomie’s Facebook feed) this compilation of “the best dunks in NCAA history.”

I don’t want to be that guy who stumbles across a list of best guitarists and says, “How could you leave out Blind Elderberry Pie?! Jimi Hendrix just stole everything from him!”

I will, however, point out the following:

1. Charging could’ve been called on about half these dunks.

2. This guy rounds up tons of clips of guys dunking on other guys, yet he misses Phil Henderson over Alonzo Mourning, showing us how to dunk over someone without charging:

Yes, I’m a Dukie, but even the selections involving my school are questionable. The Dahntay Jones dunk in the top 10 is OK, but I’d argue for a few items from the Robert Brickey catalog instead.

And two of the honorable mentions should be in the top 50, maybe the top 10. Grant Hill’s alley-oop off a pass that frankly got away from Bobby Hurley was just insane.

And as one of the commenters put it — if Jerry Stackhouse’s dunk against Duke’s Parks and Meek is “honorable mention,” there’s no reason to keep watching.

Tagged with:
Jun 15

Two interesting posts from respected bloggers (well, *I* respect them) in the past 24 hours:

- At Pitch Invasion, Tom Dunmore takes the news of a spat between BigSoccer and Premier League pundit Ollie Irish as a launching point for an insightful look at the business of blogging.

- Fake Sigi, sounding curiously frustrated, says it’s time for a breather.

(For the record, FS, I didn’t “invite” Sirk but welcomed his company — same goes for you.)

The fundamental question here is what you can reasonably expect from blogging. And the answers are as diverse as the blogosphere itself.

Continue reading »

Tagged with:
Apr 28

D.C. United and the Washington Freedom play a doubleheader on Saturday, and it’ll be interesting to see how many United fans stick around for the women’s game. The typical MLS-women’s doubleheader has been ladies first. This one’s reversed. I’ve posted about it at The Huffington Post, tracing what has happened since a Freedom-United doubleheader would draw more than 20,000 by halftime of the first game on the bill.

The MLS game could have added interest thanks to a dramatic development today — D.C. United re-signed former league MVP Luciano Emilio. He might be cleared to play Saturday, says the Post‘s Steven Goff. The injury-riddled team has started 0-4.

Tagged with:
Apr 23

The first thing you’ll notice about A Beautiful Game is that it’s a beautiful book. The photography is rich and diverse — a treasured pair of dirty boots in Liberia, a youth clinic in Cambodia, a junkyard kickabout in Brazil, Fabio Cannavaro with a medal in Germany. Flip through the pages, and the scenes are as vibrant as the made-for-HD Planet Earth and Life TV series. Put the book on a coffee table, and you may find visitors flipping through it regardless of their level of soccer interest.

The text of the book is a collection of essays from mostly famous players around the world, all telling their stories of how they grew up with the game. The 41 essayists include some of the world’s biggest names — Lionel Messi, Luis Figo, Franck Ribery (unfortunate timing, given his current scandal) and Cannavaro. Yet coincidentally or not, Major League Soccer is well-represented. Landon Donovan is the chosen American. Former MLS players Ivan Guerrero, Claudio Suarez, Carlos Ruiz and Ryan Nelsen contribute along with current Chivas USA teammates Ante Jazic and Maykel Galindo.

Best of all these is a riveting introduction from David Beckham about a UNICEF visit to Sierra Leone. Beckham talks openly of his fear of being overwhelmed by the conditions he would find on his visit, but as he tells it, he left the country full of hope after greeting families with hugs — and a football. The introduction sets the tone: No matter the circumstances, football gives children hope and joy. Five percent of the book’s proceeds will go to UNICEF sports projects.

The downside is that the stories, though they’re drawn from diverse countries, tend to sound the same after a while. Whether they’re playing on the streets of Honduras or in a club in Finland, the players all talk of playing until sundown and forging their happiest memories kicking about with their friends. Browse through the book in several sittings, and this disadvantage is quickly forgotten.

Yet the book has a deeper drawback. As inclusive as it is for people of different national origins, economic backgrounds and faiths, it’s not gender-inclusive. Women are barely visible — a shot of the U.S. team celebrating stands out as the reader flips through pages and pages of boys and men. How much would we love to read the story of Brandi Chastain picking up the game as girls were first encouraged to play in the USA? Or Marta, learning to play in a culture less accommodating to women’s soccer? (Or so we think.)

That’s the one major oversight. Otherwise, this fine book opens the reader’s eyes to the world, not with sad and shocking tales but with inspirational stories of global joy.

The details: A Beautiful Game, edited by Tom Watt, HarperOne (imprint of HarperCollins), release May 2010

Apr 11

When Phil Mickelson is asked what to serve at the Champions Dinner at next year’s Masters, he should ask if everyone has had enough Tiger barbecue.

It takes a lot to make anyone feel sympathy for a serial adulterer, but the breathless Tiger coverage has done it. Over the weekend, Woods’ every word has been scrutinized as much as the Bill of Rights has in the last 220 1/2 years.

Indeed, the Masters weekend has shown us that media coverage tends to be consistent — within a finite period of time. Commentator A will usually agree with Commentator B, disagreeing only over to what degree they agree — in other words, who agrees the most.

But over a longer scope of time, media coverage is wildly inconsistent. Tom Hanks’ “Mr. Short-Term Memory” would’ve been a good pundit.

Consider Phil Mickelson, cast as “good” in this weekend’s “good vs. evil” morality play. That wasn’t always the case, of course. A couple of years ago, Mickelson was fair game for teasing such as this. And he hasn’t always been the friendliest guy with the media. Not sure anyone could blame him, given the way he was constantly criticized for being too aggressive on the golf course, always embracing a risk-reward shot no matter how great the risk.

It would take a brave or foolish pundit to go against the grain on Mickelson this weekend under any circumstances. His wife and mother were diagnosed with breast cancer within a few weeks of each other last year. And that swashbuckling form that many in the media hated had always earned him a cult following. (Disclosure: I always considered myself more aligned with the “cult following” than the “media,” though perhaps that’s because I almost always go against the mob mentality.)

This weekend, everyone’s applauding Phil’s daring shots and bemoaning Tiger’s intensity. Three years ago, you could’ve flipped that. Tiger’s profanity might get the same mild tut-tut that a wayward Mickelson shot would today.

That’s because Phil’s insane aggression and Tiger’s intense mindset are the same. And we like people doing whatever it takes to win … when they win.

Until, of course, you start winning too much, like Duke. Or Tiger. And then the underdogs get a free pass to hate.

Just like that musical about a guy who makes a deal with the devil to help his team beat some other team … what was it called? Oh yes …

Damn Yankees.

Better not repeat that show title out on the course, Tiger.

Tagged with:
Apr 06

We’re Americans, with a capital ‘A’, huh? You know what that means? Do ya? That means that our forefathers were kicked out of every decent country in the world. We are the wretched refuse. We’re the underdog. We’re mutts! … We’re mutants. There’s something wrong with us, something very, very wrong with us. Something seriously wrong with us – we’re soldiers. But we’re American soldiers! We’ve been kicking ass for 200 years! We’re 10 and 1!

- John Winger (Bill Murray), Stripes

America may be the biggest and most powerful country the world has seen since Britain decided to quit naming most of the world after its monarchs, but we still love the underdog. No one’s making a movie about the big school with the great facilities that won the Indiana high school basketball championship as expected.

Once upon a time, Mike Krzyzewski and Duke were the underdogs challenging the long reign of Dean Smith and North Carolina in the ACC. No one had a clue of what was to come. True story: In a freshman dorm at Duke in the fall of 1987, someone said it was a shame we had all arrived after all the good basketball. And no one doubted it.

That’s changed a bit. The well-mannered runners-up with the unruly trend-setting crowd have become champions once, twice, three and now four times. By 2001, most people were sick of seeing Shane Battier on ESPN, no matter how likable and admirable the guy was. And seriously, what was up with that “Who’s your daddy Battier” chant?

Duke is also seen as a place of privilege, and as a standout Salon piece points out, Americans have mixed feelings about that. They’re not even consistent in how they apply that prejudice to basketball. Why would Duke be any more evil than Georgetown, another private school where the rent is a lot higher than it is in the crime-infested neighborhoods around Duke?

Continue reading »

Tagged with:
preload preload preload