They need to show some ambition
World Cup 2006: half day
They needed to show some ambition, Angola. I know this because the humourless David Pleat kept saying so. Nevertheless, they didn't show enough, and lost to Portugal. My friend Lee Mack was at this match. I couldn't see him. In fact, I missed a lot of yesterday's action, due to having to do a three-hour radio show, put in about two hours' "prep" (ie. reading the Sunday papers, going over the running order etc.), and having to travel about two and a half hours to get in to Central London from Reigate and back. That's the best part of a day. Results service:
SUNDAY
Serbio & Montenegro 0 Holland 1
Missed this. Another hard-fought victory from one of the seeded teams. The Serbs have a player called S Milosovic. Isn't that a bit like being a German called Hitler? (I said "a bit like".)
Mexico 3 Iran 1
Came home in time for the bulk of the second half, but found it difficult to get into. A clean game. At the end of the first half they had 0 minutes stoppage time, which tells you how smooth it was. As Iran move into "constuctive discussion" about their nuclear programme at home, their players put on a strong showing against the South Americans, but the two goals I saw put them in a different league. I liked the way the Mexicans use the Mexico 70 typeface for the names on the backs of their shirts. I am quite fascinated by the lettering used by different teams. Germany's is very stern. Angola's, all lower case, no upper case, is modern, but only in a 1980s sort of way. And Costa Rica looked like they'd had their strip made up at a t-shirt shop on the way to San Jose Airport - the jaunty, drop-shadowed lettering looked like the kind you'd get on the side of a mobile disco. Curious. And probably irrelevant to David Pleat. He's missing out.
Portugal 1 Angola 0
Although the politics was different, with Angola being a former colony of Portugal, this was remarkably similar to England Paraguay. The favourites got an early goal in (Pauleta, five minutes, none of your rubbish) and then spent the rest of the game clinging to it, with their star player, Ronaldo, being inexplicably taken off at the start of the second half, suitably frustrated. Enjoyable match nonetheless, as it's always good to see a smaller team prove more than a match for the favourites, and Angola had some worthy chances. What they lacked was a number of players with just one name. Even though they do actually have first names, Portuagal's Figo, Ricardo, Costinha, Tiago, Pauleta, and even second keeper Quim (ha ha) dispense with them, and like Madonna, Chico and Batman, trade without. This means their whole name is on the back of their shirt, which must be a psychological advantage. Pauleta's actual first name is Pedro.
I'm already getting frustrated knowing that work will prevent me from watching all three matches most days this coming week, except Thursday, when I suspect Lee will let us off early to get home in time for the 5pm kickoff for England Trinidad. Today, for instance, I am writing from home, but won't be able to justify clocking off for Australia Japan at 2pm. Let's see how much hilarious sitcom I can get written in this heat and aim for USA Czech Republic at 5pm. Thank God these things only happen once every two years.
posted by Andrew Collins @ 7:34 AM
11 Comments
Contact
Andrew at
11 Comments:
Don't want to be too much of a smartarse, but Mexico is in North America - Mexicans and, indeed, Central and South Americans are quite keen to catch the uninformed Anglos out on this point, so it's worth remembering for future reference.
And it's once every four years.
Keep it up, though.
I'll take the Mexico/North America point on the chin and claim ignorance. Won't do it again. However, I meant once every two years. I actually do know that the World Cup comes round every four years. I mean a major international or pan-European football championship. Is it your intention to take all the fun out of me writing about football by picking me up on every single thing I get or spell wrong? Do other bloggers enjoy this sort of attention to detail?
Oh, and why be anonymous? That's not really in the spirit of this friendly blog.
Don't take things too personally Andrew, as you're doing a grand job with the results and match summary service (and you've not mentioned 1966 once, for which I applaud you!).
Doug
Ignore the pedants Andrew, you're doing a fine job. Knowledge comes second to enthusiasm in my humble opinion. Having said that, I haven't seen you make a point that can't be said to be valid.
May I just plug a communal world cup blog here that myself and a few friends are keeping? Contributers are split between those who love the game, those who hate it and those who are keen but misinformed.
http://curledwup.blogspot.com
(Be warned there is some swearing.)
(If it is way too cheeky I will, of course, remove this comment!)
On the topic of one-name names, hearing Gary Lineker calling new panellist Brazilian World Cup winner Leonardo, Leonardo, was a simple pleasure; don't know why, it might be his first name for all I know. I really want them to get Socrates on there to hear Gary call him Socrates and ask him anything.
My favourite ever headline involved David Pleat, when after a heavy defeat for Spurs under his management, one of the tabloids went for 'COMPLEATLY USELESS'.
I think you are being a bit unfair on David Pleat although he did have far worse headlines when he was caught kerb-crawling many years ago.
He's my favourite "expert" by a mile as he truly analyses the game-plan of each team with forensic detail. He assumes that the viewer has a certain level of knowledge of the game so I can see why people might find him a bit technical. His column in the Guardian in which he illustrates tactics and formations on a flip-chart is the best thing about that paper at the moment, imho.
I looked at this blog, mentioned by Clive Pounds above, and it's very entertaining, and gives lots of different rolling perspectives on the World Cup. It's called Curled Wup and I give it my papal blessing.
That's most kind sir.
I'm the person who posted the first comment and I want to apologise for it - I didn't mean to post something that unpleasant, but I did, and I'm sorry. I'm posting this anonymously because... well, I'm really ashamed, actually.
I really like this blog, by the way, and the "keep it up" comment was genuine.
Apologies again for the offence, and the moral cowardice (compounded here) of hiding in anonymity. If I ever have anything constructive to say I promise I'll sign it.
(And the absolute idiocy of posting this in the previous day's comments first, then realising it was in the wrong place and sticking it here... gah!)
Accepted. It's a love-in again. (I can just about take criticism, by the way, I'm a stickler for accuracy in spelling, punctuation and fact, and I certainly don't expect everyone to agree with my opinions, be they on refereeing decisions or the benefits of wind turbines, but there's a difference between a dialogue and needling. This blog would be a less interesting place without the comments.)
Post a Comment
<< Home