(07-03-2010 11:29 PM)QuitoTiger Wrote:  Not much of a chance, but I'm gonna stay true to my South American peeps.
GO URUGUAY!

I do not like the way that Uruguay won, but I don't think they advance. I think it will be Germany over the Netherlands in the final. For that matter, I like the way that the Netherlands advanced even less than the way that Uruguay did.

I have to wonder if this is really the end of South American soccer. Even though Dunga got the axe, I think that they will eventually return to European style soccer, and the rest of the South Americans will join the dark side, starting with Argentina.

(07-05-2010 04:35 PM)I45owl Wrote:  

(07-03-2010 11:29 PM)QuitoTiger Wrote:  Not much of a chance, but I'm gonna stay true to my South American peeps.
GO URUGUAY!

I do not like the way that Uruguay won, but I don't think they advance. I think it will be Germany over the Netherlands in the final. For that matter, I like the way that the Netherlands advanced even less than the way that Uruguay did.

I have to wonder if this is really the end of South American soccer. Even though Dunga got the axe, I think that they will eventually return to European style soccer, and the rest of the South Americans will join the dark side, starting with Argentina.

What?!

This could get good...

(07-05-2010 08:15 PM)QuitoTiger Wrote:  

(07-05-2010 04:35 PM)I45owl Wrote:  I have to wonder if this is really the end of South American soccer. Even though Dunga got the axe, I think that they will eventually return to European style soccer, and the rest of the South Americans will join the dark side, starting with Argentina.

What?!

I assume you're reacting to that last part. What I'm talking about is style of play - one touch soccer (European style) versus creative spontaneous play that I would characterize as South American - classic Brazillian, Argentine play. Dunga seemed to move towards rigid, organized play that is more typical of European soccer and the Brazillian fans didn't like it. I'd expect a short term move back towards more traditional Brazillian play but if they don't have great success then I'd expect a return to someone like Dunga. Except for Brazil, host S. Korea, and now Uruguay, it's been all European finals for the last 5 world cups at least. I would expect some changes in the future. Uruguay got through a bracket that didn't have any European teams, so there was one guaranteed spot in the semifinals for a non-European club.

(07-06-2010 10:50 AM)I45owl Wrote:  

(07-05-2010 08:15 PM)QuitoTiger Wrote:  

(07-05-2010 04:35 PM)I45owl Wrote:  I have to wonder if this is really the end of South American soccer. Even though Dunga got the axe, I think that they will eventually return to European style soccer, and the rest of the South Americans will join the dark side, starting with Argentina.

What?!

I assume you're reacting to that last part. What I'm talking about is style of play - one touch soccer (European style) versus creative spontaneous play that I would characterize as South American - classic Brazillian, Argentine play. Dunga seemed to move towards rigid, organized play that is more typical of European soccer and the Brazillian fans didn't like it. I'd expect a short term move back towards more traditional Brazillian play but if they don't have great success then I'd expect a return to someone like Dunga. Except for Brazil, host S. Korea, and now Uruguay, it's been all European finals for the last 5 world cups at least. I would expect some changes in the future. Uruguay got through a bracket that didn't have any European teams, so there was one guaranteed spot in the semifinals for a non-European club.

It's the overstatement I question. Actually, of the last 5 World Cups, Brazil won two ('94, '02), and since 1970, a South American side has won 50% of those, so I don't agree with the rationale. It has been every other year with a South American side winning with '64-'70 showing consecutive SA winners. This year's cup will be the exception to the "every other year" appearance of a SA side in the Final. I don't see that as evidence of any kind of "the end of South American soccer". If you will acquiesce to your prejudice as I, maybe we can agree on that point. :-)

(07-06-2010 11:25 AM)QuitoTiger Wrote:  

(07-06-2010 10:50 AM)I45owl Wrote:  

(07-05-2010 08:15 PM)QuitoTiger Wrote:  

(07-05-2010 04:35 PM)I45owl Wrote:  I have to wonder if this is really the end of South American soccer. Even though Dunga got the axe, I think that they will eventually return to European style soccer, and the rest of the South Americans will join the dark side, starting with Argentina.

What?!

I assume you're reacting to that last part. What I'm talking about is style of play - one touch soccer (European style) versus creative spontaneous play that I would characterize as South American - classic Brazillian, Argentine play. Dunga seemed to move towards rigid, organized play that is more typical of European soccer and the Brazillian fans didn't like it. I'd expect a short term move back towards more traditional Brazillian play but if they don't have great success then I'd expect a return to someone like Dunga. Except for Brazil, host S. Korea, and now Uruguay, it's been all European finals for the last 5 world cups at least. I would expect some changes in the future. Uruguay got through a bracket that didn't have any European teams, so there was one guaranteed spot in the semifinals for a non-European club.

It's the overstatement I question. Actually, of the last 5 World Cups, Brazil won two ('94, '02), and since 1970, a South American side has won 50% of those, so I don't agree with the rationale. It has been every other year with a South American side winning with '64-'70 showing consecutive SA winners. This year's cup will be the exception to the "every other year" appearance of a SA side in the Final. I don't see that as evidence of any kind of "the end of South American soccer". If you will acquiesce to your prejudice as I, maybe we can agree on that point. :-)

Of course, the first part of the sentence that I highlighted understates the fact that Brazil is a regular in the finals and has won, but they are the only S. American team until Uruguay to do that for several cups.

Fair enough. The interesting thing to me will be the Argentine reaction to getting trounced by Germany. There's the drama than the Scweinsteiger-Maradona tiff, but the fact is that Argentina was exposed as too reactionary.

Soccernomics lists several factors as a basis for their model of how successful countries should be at the world cup. Chief among them are GDP, Population, and history of international play (how many games dating back to the 1800s). At best, the latter seems a proxy for other factors that should be considered. I think there are problems with the author's model, but I would think that Argentina thinks that they should have performed better over the past 20 years.

The model that Soccernomics puts out indicates that England is more successful than they should be. Argentina should be roughly on the same level as England, and I would guess that their expectations are that they should have the same success as Brazil or Germany. So, no matter what they do, they may not fare any better than their recent history, but I wouldn't be surprised to see them make big changes.

All of that said, I do not want to see it. I generally like the creative play of South Americans and would like to seem them have success over the regimented style of the Europeans. I think the world needs both.

(07-06-2010 12:46 PM)I45owl Wrote:  

(07-06-2010 11:25 AM)QuitoTiger Wrote:  

(07-06-2010 10:50 AM)I45owl Wrote:  

(07-05-2010 08:15 PM)QuitoTiger Wrote:  

(07-05-2010 04:35 PM)I45owl Wrote:  I have to wonder if this is really the end of South American soccer. Even though Dunga got the axe, I think that they will eventually return to European style soccer, and the rest of the South Americans will join the dark side, starting with Argentina.

What?!

I assume you're reacting to that last part. What I'm talking about is style of play - one touch soccer (European style) versus creative spontaneous play that I would characterize as South American - classic Brazillian, Argentine play. Dunga seemed to move towards rigid, organized play that is more typical of European soccer and the Brazillian fans didn't like it. I'd expect a short term move back towards more traditional Brazillian play but if they don't have great success then I'd expect a return to someone like Dunga. Except for Brazil, host S. Korea, and now Uruguay, it's been all European finals for the last 5 world cups at least. I would expect some changes in the future. Uruguay got through a bracket that didn't have any European teams, so there was one guaranteed spot in the semifinals for a non-European club.

It's the overstatement I question. Actually, of the last 5 World Cups, Brazil won two ('94, '02), and since 1970, a South American side has won 50% of those, so I don't agree with the rationale. It has been every other year with a South American side winning with '64-'70 showing consecutive SA winners. This year's cup will be the exception to the "every other year" appearance of a SA side in the Final. I don't see that as evidence of any kind of "the end of South American soccer". If you will acquiesce to your prejudice as I, maybe we can agree on that point. :-)

Of course, the first part of the sentence that I highlighted understates the fact that Brazil is a regular in the finals and has won, but they are the only S. American team until Uruguay to do that for several cups.

Fair enough. The interesting thing to me will be the Argentine reaction to getting trounced by Germany. There's the drama than the Scweinsteiger-Maradona tiff, but the fact is that Argentina was exposed as too reactionary.

Soccernomics lists several factors as a basis for their model of how successful countries should be at the world cup. Chief among them are GDP, Population, and history of international play (how many games dating back to the 1800s). At best, the latter seems a proxy for other factors that should be considered. I think there are problems with the author's model, but I would think that Argentina thinks that they should have performed better over the past 20 years.

The model that Soccernomics puts out indicates that England is more successful than they should be. Argentina should be roughly on the same level as England, and I would guess that their expectations are that they should have the same success as Brazil or Germany. So, no matter what they do, they may not fare any better than their recent history, but I wouldn't be surprised to see them make big changes.

All of that said, I do not want to see it. I generally like the creative play of South Americans and would like to seem them have success over the regimented style of the Europeans. I think the world needs both.

It's a much revered cliche, "¿Cual es el mejor negocio en el mundo? Respuesta: Comprar a un Argentino por lo que vale, y venderlo por lo que piensa que vale." ("What is the best business deal in the world? Answer: Buy an Argentinean for what he's worth, and sell him for what he thinks he's worth.") particularly among Colombians - they still have t-shirts printed with "5-0, Ché" when they embarrassed Argentina several years back.

That said, they processed immigration papers for the whole, returning Argentine team ON THE PLANE in Buenos Aires after their embarrassing exit from this year's cup. I personally think Maradona is history, and what he wished on Pelé will ironically befall him. Also, he was the primary reason Riquelme did not make a final appearance on the Selección - though he's 33 and change, he still could have made an impact.

The colorful, 'samba-type' style and movement of both Brazil and Argentina, even though it appears to be somewhat poorly thought out when compared to the European style, would be sorely missed from a World Cup, and since futbol is as much a reflection of culture as it is exact science, South American DNA cannot be extracted from its approach on the pitch anymore or less than can a European side. Obligatory: IMO.