I thank Adam Spangler at This is American Soccer for the heads-up on two interesting articles that Soccer America ran this week on the connections between Latin America and soccer and the United States.

First came SA’s piece on SUM (Soccer United Marketing), a company set up by MLS, to promote all types of games being played in the United States. The article details the work that SUM has done to coordinate the many games being played on American soil, many of which do not involve American teams (in 2005, for example, the US beat Colombia in front of 7,000 fans while close by Mexico played Argentina before 52,000). Because SUM is run by MLS, it has the fledgling league’s interests in mind. It promotes MLS at international friendlies and other games, hoping to attract these fans to the American league.

While SUM appears to be doing a good job of bringing interest and money into American soccer, a second Soccer America article details the disturbing trend of Mexican-American players leaving this country. Mike Woitola writes about several youngsters who have returned to their parents’ homeland to play professionally. One, Sonny Guadarrama of Santos Laguna, has even been called up to the Mexican U-20s. Why are players like Guadarrama going to Mexico to start their careers? Woitola writes that “more Latino players from the USA are looking to Mexico, whose clubs may have a better appreciation for their style of play.” He quotes an American college coach who concurs, saying that MLS ignores smaller, more technical players.

Sonny Guadarrama played at Campbell University before heading to Mexico

While running the risk of sounding like Paul Gardner, I have to agree with the assertion that American soccer in general values size and strength over technical ability. Growing up as a fairly technical but not huge player myself, I was often kicked around by larger and less skilled opponents. I know I’m not alone. Look at the American national team today and who can we claim as truly technically skilled. Landon Donovan, perhaps, but put next to nearly any Brazilian, his skills would pale by comparison. And has America ever produced a true #10? It’s not that we don’t have the talent to produce technical players, it’s that our coaching generally ignores such players. Hopefully, this exodus of Mexican-American players, albeit small at this point, will be a wake-up call.

Another interesting point that this articles raises, albeit indirectly, is the increasing number of players with more than one nationality. As the pace of globalization has continued to increase, the number of people moving across borders has also skyrocketed. The number of people with more than one nationality is also increasingly substantially. Professional soccer players in such a predicament often have a difficult choice to make in terms of the country they represent internationally. Take these few examples: Kevin Kuranyi (eligible for Panama, Brazil, and Germany), Owen Hargreaves (Canada, Wales, and England), and Nery Castillo (Uruguay, Greece, and Mexico). It will be interesting to see in the future how the issue of players with more than one nationality will choose which country they represent.

Nery Castillo (in red) playing for his club team, Olympiakos

Latin America may produce some of the most technically skilled players in the world, but their organization of the game often leaves something to be desired. Those in charge of the game in many countries are inept at best, corrupt at worst. Take, for example, the “Byzantine system” of promotion and relegation that exists in many countries in the region, which Brian Homewood wrote about for Reuters this week. The details vary in leagues across the region, but the point in all of these systems is to protect the big teams from being relegated. By deciding who goes down based on results over several seasons, big clubs experiencing one difficult campaign are often spared from the drop. Homewood gives an example from Brazil, which has historically been one of the worst offenders in this regard:

In 1999, Gama went to court after being relegated and forced the 2000 championship to be scrapped altogether. A massive 108-team tournament called the Copa Joao Havelange was created in its place.

Fortunately, however, Brazil appears to have turned a corner, with a logical system that is enforced. The result, writes Homewood, is that big clubs are going down when they deserve to and “the Brazilian second division, until recently a twilight zone shunned by the public and media, is flourishing with televised matches and attendances often bettering the top flight.”

Joan Laporta, president of Barcelona, visited Stanford this past week (thanks to my brother, who’s a student there and told me about it). Laporta gave a speech in which he extolled the virtues of the Catalan club. He talked about Barca’s “pioneering global alliance with UNICEF” as part of the club’s goal of “positioning the social identity of the club.” Laporta continued: “Football makes an incredible amount of money these days, and it is only right that part of the money goes to less fortunate people.” Such statements are a far cry from most professional clubs, concerned only with results and profits.

Joan Laporta speaking at Stanford on May 7

While Laporta clearly has more of a social conscience than most club presidents, I can’t help but wonder if some of these policies are less altruistic than they appear. Barcelona’s decision to wear UNICEF logos on their uniforms will likely win them sympathizers, thus increasing their support, which will probably increase jersey sales, and in the end make them more money. It reminds me of socially responsible policies that some businesses have adopted. While sponsoring charity events is a great thing to do, it’s not like the company is not benefiting from having their name plastered all over the place. That said, it’s better that companies and soccer clubs at least think about social issues, rather than simply focus on their own narrow interests.

Moving to Europe, the Scottish National Party (SNP) won the largest bloc in the Scottish assembly in last week’s election. That victory is notable because the SNP advocates Scottish independence. But it’s notable to this blog because the SNP victory came in spite of some high-profile soccer people’s call for Scots to keep the UK united. This is slightly ironic, of course, because soccer is one of the few areas where an independent Scotland exists. In any case, Sir Alex Ferguson and Alex McLeish’s appeals “urg[ing] every patriotic Scot to help maintain Scotland’s place in the United Kingdom which has served Scotland well” failed.

Jonathan Wilson continued his excellent series of pieces on soccer in Eastern Europe, this week taking us to Hungary. There, a Hungarian-American named Geroge Hemingway has bought Ferenc Puskas’s former club, Honved, and is looking bring back their glory days. Hemingway is not doing it completely for nostalgia; he also wants Honved to turn a profit. And as Wilson points out, with “for a gamble of £5m – two years’ worth of investment – there was the possibility of reaping the riches of the Champions League group stage: £40m or so directly, plus the knock-on benefits of increased exposure.” American owners in England are big news, but their dollars are affecting soccer across Europe.

Some quick hits to finish off:

• Bill Redlin, the morning announcer on my local public radio station, WAMU, said last Monday that DC United had beaten Chivas 2-1. That was all correct, except that he pronounced Chivas like “shivas,” as in sitting shiva.
• An article in the Christian Science Monitor on Tony Blair’s legacy use this example to describe how long the British PM has been in office: “Few foreigners played soccer for the top clubs (now few Englishmen do).”
• In another indication of how far football in England has come in recent times, a post the blog Two Hundred Percent discussed the Forgotten Football Disaster that was the Bradford Fire of 1985. In contrast to the luxurious surroundings of many stadiums today, the folks at Two Hundred Percent say that “You have to think very hard about it, but the simple fact of the matter is that the majority of English football stadia were unsafe in the early 1980s.” Ian Plenderleith said much the same thing in an April 30 interview with the podcast EPL Talk. There will also be those who talk about how great things used to be, but I think it’s important to recognize that advances in stadium safety are beneficial to all.
• Sevilla has a hilarious club anthem, sung by a neo-flamanco singer named El Arrebato.
• Check out these reviews of two soccer-related movies. Sons of Sakhnin United, about an ethnically mixed team in Israel, and The Power of the Game, were both shown recently at the Tribeca Film Festival in New York and reviewed by Adam Spanger at This is American Soccer as well as by Alan Miller at the Huffington Post.
• I recommend Tom Dunmore’s reflections on MLS. As an Englishman watching the Chicago Fire this year, Dunmore is, as one of the comments puts it, a “modern day de Tocqueville.”
• Some apostates, sorry children, in Chile are giving up soccer for baseball. Who knew?
• And for a bizarre sport to finish off, how about Irish road bowling? Basically, you have to roll a “bullet” down a road, sometimes for miles, and hit a target. It’s big in West Virginia, apparently.

The economics of the Premier League (EPL) and the global rush to buy English teams proved to be the topic du jour this week. You know the league is making a splash worldwide when it gets a long article in the American news weekly Time Magazine. That article showed how the EPL has gone from a troubled and unprofitable league in the 1980s to last season, when it earned around $2.5 billion in revenue worldwide. Adam Smith writes that “The Premiership’s triple play – losing the hooligans, luring big money at home, expanding overseas – has made it the envy of other sports leagues.”

Losing the hooligans and getting more UK-based money have been necessary prerequisites to the EPL’s success, but it is really the overseas expansions that has made the league into the economic juggernaut it is today. The EPL, for example, gets $1.23 billion a year in TV rights outside of the UK, nearly a quarter of its total income.

This worldwide reach has had both positive and negative effects back home. Sponsors are eager to sign up, knowing their brand will get worldwide exposure. Martin Sullivan, CEO of insurance giant, AIG said his company’s sponsorship of Manchester United wasn’t about the UK market, but instead “buying Asia.”

Flush with cash, English clubs can now lure the best players from around the world with high salaries (there are over 300 foreign players in the EPL). Fans in England have been treated to a footballing master class in the past few years as world-class players have come to their once humble league. But as their league has become more and more financially successful, it has also attracted less wanted newcomers: foreign owners. As Richard Scudamore recently told the Sunday Telegraph, “One of the consequences of becoming of interest globally is that you’re going to attract global interest not just in a fan sense but in an owner sense.”

Many of these new owners are Americans and Mark Zeigler gave a run-down of the Yanks who recently have bought into or are planning to buy into the EPL. The main reason for these wealthy businessmen to buy English teams is, not surprisingly, economic. Ziegler quotes David Carter, executive of USC’s Sports Business Institute saying, “What you’re starting to see is that this isn’t about a love for soccer. It’s about the love of money. These guys understand that sports is a global opportunity for them, and they see an opportunity for growth.”

Americans George Gillett (R) and Tom Hicks (L) recently bought Liverpool

Also unsurprisingly, many English fans are not happy to have their beloved clubs seen simply as growth opportunities. The clubs being bought up have long histories and deep connections to the communities where they sprung up. This connection was evident in local owners (Adam Smith points out in the Time article that Manchester United “was led through much of the ’60s and ’70s by an enterprising local butcher”) who had little interest in profiting from clubs. Indeed, the idea that club directors were not to profit from this work was codified by the FA, as David Conn points out in an article for Sports Illustrated.

The history of the game supports the gut instinct of many fans that these men were supposed to remain true to their own descriptions of themselves as “custodians” of the clubs, and not make money out of them. The FA imposed rules on the clubs’ constitutions that prevented directors being paid salaries and limited shareholders’ dividends.

But, as Conn points out, this rule was largely ignored as teams became publicly listed companies, a change which ultimately made it possible for wealthy investors to come in from outside and take over local clubs.

The economic success of the Premier League is a double-edged sword, especially for English fans. They are happy to see their make money which can buy them better players, coaches, and ultimately success. But they also worry that these profits are bringing in characters who only see potential profit and are ignorant of the clubs’ histories and tradition. Economic success has fundamentally changed the Premier League. The only question is whether these changes are positive or negative.

While the new American investors got the lion’s share of attention this week, Patrick Barclay had an interesting article in the Telegraph headlined Chelsea Owe it All to Yelstin. Barclay writes that the recently deceased former Russian leader “was responsible for creating the so-called ‘oligarchs’, among them Roman Abramovich.” It should also be pointed out that Portsmouth’s new owner Alexandre Gaydamk is the son of Arcadi Gaydamak, another Russian who profited enormously from Yelstin’s breakup of formerly state-run Soviet enterprises. Perhaps Bill Clinton had a Reagan-esque moment with Yelstin in private: Mr. Yelstin, tear down these state-owned monopolies and enrich oligarchs who can later invest in Premier League teams. Perhaps not.

Thanks, Boris!

Private ownership of clubs is becoming more and more commonplace in England, but this is not the case in Argentina, where Neil Clack writes in that “Argentinian law currently states that football clubs must be non-profitable organisations, owned exclusively by supporters.” This law, however, is being questioned because some see it as allowing the notoriously violent barra brava fan clubs to flourish. Writes Clack in the Sunday Herald,

The [Argentine] government looks to Europe and sees that privately-owned clubs don’t have the problems brought by democracy and elections. In Argentina, with hooligan groups counting for so many votes, it is in the interests of club presidents to keep them sweet, supplying them with free tickets and travel, turning a blind eye to criminal activities.

The Argentine police have not been terribly successful in controlling violence wrought by the barra bravas. This lack of success, Clack writes, is partly due to past excesses. Police, Clack writes, “are obliged to take a cautious approach, at first, as a result of the legacy of the military dictatorship, when police brutality was extreme. Nipping the problem in the bud is certainly not the policy as they line up with riot shields in front of the fighting, but taking little action.”

Argentine police arrest fans in February

There was an interesting series of articles in the Guardian this week on the Arsenal women’s team, including a great set of photos of the team in action. Arsenal has largely dominated the Women’s Premier League (they haven’t lost in the competition since 2003) and this year achieved something new: winning the Women’s UEFA Cup, the equivalent of the Champions League. In doing so, they beat Sweden’s Umea, who can count the brilliant Brazilian Marta in their ranks.

Georgina Turner reports on the Arsenal Ladies and hopes that their recent success can be carried over into the upcoming Women’s World Cup with England.

I have to admit that I pay far less attention to the women’s game than I do to the fellas. I do wonder, however, if we may be reaching a sort of critical mass in women’s soccer. Since the first Women’s World Cup in 1991, the competition has been dominated by a few countries (USA, Canada, China, Germany, Norway, and Sweden). Even in the successful 1999 tournament in the US, most of the teams at the competition were extremely poor (see, for example, the Americans’ 7-1 victory over what was promised to be a “strong” Nigerian team).

It would be nice if there were more teams who could put out strong teams in the women’s game. I recognize the many impediments against doing so (most notably, sexist attitudes against women playing soccer in many parts of the world), but believe it’s only a matter of time before this happens. Brazil’s rise in the past few years has been phenomenal. Could England be next?

An Arsenal Ladies player holds her cleats

Though it’s not soccer-related, I was fascinated by a New York Times article on alleged bias in refereeing in the NBA. According to an academic study, “players who were similar in all ways except skin color drew foul calls at a rate difference of up to 4% percent depending on the racial composition of an N.B.A. game’s three-person referee crew.” It’s important to note that this nobody claims that the bias is intentional, or even conscious. The Times reporter, Allan Schwarz, quotes another academic who says that: “There’s a growing consensus that a large proportion of racialized decisions is not driven by any conscious race discrimination, but that it is often just driven by unconscious, or subconscious, attitudes. When you force people to make snap decisions, they often can’t keep themselves from subconsciously treating blacks different than whites, men different from women.”

In an interview with the radio show Marketplace, Schwarz says that players deny the existence of bias in referees’ decisions, but claims that this does not disprove the study.

I think need to remember this type of bias . . . the whole point behind it is it is not detectable by the person who experiences it. Or certainly not detectable in any accurate manner. It is a phenomenon that can only be diagnosed through a very large amount of interactions and data. And no individual player could possibly amass that type of experience

Others, including the NBA itself, also dispute the results of this study. That said, I wonder what the results would be if someone were to try to do a similar study in soccer. Many European leagues have players of all different backgrounds, although the referees are almost exclusively white. Actually, aside from Uriah Rennie, I don’t know if I’ve ever seen a non-white referee in a top level European match. Given that, would there be similar results to those of the study reported on in the Times? I don’t know, but it would be interesting to find out.

Uriah Rennie chats with Sir Alex

Finally, a few quick hits to finish off:

• A player in the J-League was suspended for violating the substance abuse policy. It turned out, though, that he had taken an IV filled with a garlic infusion. I don’t know if it’s more strange that he was taking garlic via IV or that he was suspended for doing so.
• The blog Rank and Vile reported on the fight to bring a “proper rectangular stadium” to Melbourne. Currently, the local team, the Melbourne Victory, are forced to use the Telstra Dome, a facility designed for Australian Rules football.
• It seems like it wasn’t that long ago that African players in Europe were relatively rare. Now, they are everywhere, as a recent Reuters round-up shows.
• Ehud Olmert currently has single-digit approval ratings. Not surprising, then, that there have been protests urging him to resign. I like the red card reference used by protesters.

• Want to wear a dishadashah and support Argentina? The blog 360east.com shows you how.

Where can I get one of these bad boys?

• And a bizarre sport to finish off. Parkour, anyone? I have no idea how to describe it exactly, so check out the Wikipedia article on it or the recent write-up it got in the New Yorker.

Parkour: it’s something like this

The most interesting article I came across this week is an in-depth rumination on why soccer has lost its historical left-leaning political tendencies. Writing in the Guardian, Barney Ronay’s column, headlined Anyone Want to Play on the Left?, charts the course of the game from its working class roots (“Historically, football’s politics, such as they are, have tended to loiter on the left wing.”) to its state today (“A Premiership socialist? It might not even be possible.”).

Ashley “Cashley” Cole: Not a socialist

Ronay points out that while there are isolated incidents of left-leaning football sentiment (did you know that Wigan manager Paul Jewell has a tortoise named Trotsky?), they are a long way off from the time when Bill Shankly easily espoused his football/economic philosophy based on socialist ideals. “Just take a look at the Premiership,” writes Ronay, “to find out what 15 years of hot-housed free-market economics looks like.” For those interested in the intersection between soccer and politics, this article is a must read.

Soccer and politics may not often overtly mix today, but they have in the past. I have written previously about the nomadic past of Israel’s national team (they have been moved from different confederations in order to avoid politically sticky encounters against, say, Iran). This week came further details about the antipathy of some countries toward Israel’s national team. In an article about Jews in Iran (a fascinating topic on its own), Scott Peterson of the Christian Science Monitor writes about the role of soccer in fomenting dislike of the Jewish state prior to the Iranian Revolution.

During the Asian Cup final in 1968 (which Iran won, 2-1) Iranian fans wore eye patches and chanted abusive slogans, to mock the Israeli defense chief Moshe Dayan. According to published reminiscences, “some homes of Jews in Tehran were attacked and set on fire.”

In a match-up between Iran and Israel in the final of the 1974 Asian Games in Tehran, protesters against Israel, members of then-shadowy Islamic groups, prepared to attack the Israeli soccer team.

“Our aim and dream,” recalls Ezat Shahi, identified as a “revolutionary fighter” in recently published memoirs, “was to create an event similar to the 1972 Munich Olympics, when the Israeli team was taken hostage by Palestinian gunmen from “Black September,” in a standoff that left 11 Israeli athletes dead.

Security measures forced protesters to scale back those plans, but rioting broke out that night.

“On that night, [the authorities] couldn’t prevent people from doing what they wanted,” says a witness who asked not to be named. “As soon as Israel expanded its power [in the 1967 war] and oppressed the Palestinians, even the liberal part of Iranian society started to call them Zionists.” Those flames, encouraged by Islamist groups that would play a key role in the 1979 revolution, helped define the Islamic Republic’s opposition to Israel …”

I have also written previously on Argentina’s obsession with Diego Maradona. This week, an article in Argentine newspaper Clarí­n discusses the rise of weekly rumors of Diego’s death. “Rumors of Maradona’s death,” says the newspaper, “are slowly becoming an Argentine tradition.” The writer speculates that the rumors are the result of two things: 1) Argentina’s past, in the public developed suspicion of “facts” written by a media largely controlled by less-than-truthful dictators and 2) a ploy (it doesn’t say who might be behind it) to prepare the Argentine people for Maradona’s death. The writer compares the situation to that of Fidel Castro and suggests that powers behind the scenes in both countries are spreading rumors to prepare the people for the deaths of national icons.

I am very interested in the role of soccer among immigrant communities. Being an American, I am most familiar with this phenomenon in the US, but of course it exists throughout the world. This week came an interesting story which focused on the importance of soccer in the lives of African refugees in Australia. The article focuses on two players, Remzi Dermele and Salah Musa, both originally from Eritrea who have settled in Melbourne.

Remzi Dermele and friends play the beautiful game

Says Mia Bromley, director of YMCA youth services in the area, about Dermele and Musa, “[Soccer is] all they want to do. It’s what they think about. It’s what they dream about. It’s what they talk about. It’s everything.” Bromley contrasts the boys’ passion with that of many residents of their Australian city: “Footy [Australian rules football] may rule elsewhere in Melbourne. Here soccer is everything.” Hmm … an English-speaking country whose variant on rugby has become extremely popular but is increasingly challenged by immigrants who play soccer? Sounds very familiar.

Johann Cruyff is one of the best players ever, referred to as JC in his native Holland and El Salvador (“the savior”) in his adopted Barcelona. Cruyff gained much of this admiration both for his sporting skills, but also for his unique convictions. He is a believer in playing soccer the “right” way (read, an attacking, attractive style with wingers). Cruyff also has developed a cult following as pseudo-philosophical genius. A book published translated into English in 1999 called Ajax Barcelona Cruyff: The ABC of an Obstinate Maestro is simply a set of extended interviews done by two Dutch journalists with Holland’s most famous soccer star.

This week, the Netherlands World Cup Blog documented the linguistic eccentricites of Cruyff. On the occasion of Cruyff’s 60th birthday, a blogger named Jan describes the way the Dutch master has used and shaped language throughout his career. Cruyff, Jan writes, “has become a subject for liguists and social-anthropolists [sic].” Jan gives examples of how the unique way Cruyff uses language has shaped the way others speak. Cruyff has introduced new phrases to Spanish (like many learning a new language, he directly translated a saying from his native tongue, but unlike most, his misuse was adopted by the general public).

Cruyff also uses language in a creative way to express his unique philosophical convictions. Jan writes that a business book has been published on the “wisdom” of Johan Cruyff. One example of Cruyff’s wisdom (there are many, many more on the original post): “Before I make a mistake, I see it coming and then don’t make it.”

A striking picture from the New York Times this week in an article that discusses the effects of the increasing number of security walls being built around Baghdad. Let’s hope they keep children like this safe from harm, but I suspect that walls will not stop the bloodshed that is currently taking place in that country.

And a few quick hits to finish off:

• If you speak Spanish (or want an excuse to read the gibberish produced by online translators), the Spanish newspaper El Paí­s had a remembrance of William McCrum, the inventor of the penalty kick.

• Nicolas Sarkozy, the conservative presidential candidate in France, recently won the first round of voting. Now he and rival Segolene Royal are wooing those who didn’t make the final round, including centrist Francois Bayrou. Though Bayrou has not officially endorsed a candidate, he seems to be leaning towards Royal. Angered by this, Sarkozy used a soccer analogy to attempt to ward off the threat of a potential Royal-Bayrou partnership, which would almost surely win the election. Said Sarkozy, “We’ve never seen a World Cup final where it is the teams who came third and fourth that are demanding to play the final. That is called disputing people’s choice. The presidential election is not the business of the political parties, it is the business of the French people.”

• And to maintain the one-week old tradition of finishing off with a bizarre sport not at all related to soccer, the New York Times this week had an article on bicycle polo. Amazingly, this sport has existed since the 19th century (a little cheaper than polo with horses), but today it is being reinvented by hard-core bike messengers.

Brought to you by 123-cctv.com

Plenty of cameras on the market today are capable of capturing that perfect kodak moment. Even so, many still have not considered obtaining security cameras to capture photos not so desirable, but none the less, far more important. Check here for more information on security camera.

There may be no greater factor in shaping the development of soccer than money. Several writers have commented on the link between the oodles of cash that have been invading and the success of English teams in this year’s Champions League. It is surely no coincidence that Chelsea, Liverpool, and Manchester United are among the richest teams in English, indeed, the world, and are three quarters of the Champions League semifinalists.

In order to keep its status as the world’s richest league, the Premier League is following the lead of everyone else and their mother interested in making a buck today: looking to China. As Oliver Tse, the brains behind SoccerTV pointed out in a recent EPLTalk interview, teams in England see China as their growth opportunity.

Premier League bosses, then, will have been heartened by an article from the International Herald Tribune this past week about the popularity of soccer in the Middle Kingdom. Interestingly, Eric Pfanner writes that “Unlike America, where soccer is now the most popular participation sport among children, relatively few Chinese actually play the game. But in contrast to the United States, where soccer rarely breaks into network television, the sport is a media phenomenon in China.” Why is that?

The outlook for soccer’s growth in China may be rosy, but economic success in other parts of the world isn’t nearly so easy to achieve. Take, for example, the 2006 World Cup. An article on the website Just 4 Business quotes a report by German academics which “demonstrate[s] that expectations of the event having a boosting effect on the economy were completely exaggerated.”

This report is interesting, though it will probably be little noticed since the tournament was completed nearly a year ago. Positive economic effects are often cited as a rationale to have a country host a tournament. Governments vying for the rights to host a major tournament often use this rationale to support their bids (see, for example, England’s 2012 Olympic bid, which is supposed to boost depressed areas of London). But rarely have I heard cold, hard economic data to support these seemingly altruistic assertions. As someone who loves sports and cares about social justice, I find the building of new stadiums when so many people continue to live in abject poverty a difficult quandary.

Take, for example, the 2010 World Cup. The South African government will spend millions of dollars to build stadiums while half of its people live in poverty. On the other hand, I want a World Cup with stadiums worthy of the great occasion. I don’t know what the answer is, but I think that bringing economic statistics into the debate is helpful.

An artist’s rendition of the King Senzangakhona Stadium, currently under construction in Durban

The question of whether to spend money on new stadiums in a poor country will be on display in 2010 and now also in 2012. That’s because UEFA awarded Euro 2012 to the joint bid of Poland and Ukraine. Surprising many who had expected “old-Europe” power Italy to be given the tournament, Michel Platini repaid the Eastern European countries who had voted him into power by awarding the tournament to two of its members. Now that Poland and Ukraine have been awarded hosts of the tournament, they face that massive task of preparing for it.

As Jonathan Wilson points out in the Guardian, the task will be massive. Stadiums in these countries are in need of upgrades, as is general infrastructure, but Wilson optimistically suggests that “the investment a major tournament will bring will go not to a country that largely wasted its last opportunity, but to a country in desperate need of it.” I hope that these investments in Ukraine and Poland will ready them to host a successful tournament. And I hope, perhaps optimistically, that they will also benefit their people long after Euro 2012 is over.

In 2012, Europe’s best soccer players will be heading east for this prestigious tournament. But sixty years earlier, the Jews were doing everything they could to leave Central and Eastern Europe. At the conclusion of World War II, the liberated concentration camps were full of Jews who had escaped Hitler’s plans to exterminate them, many of whom would later go to Israel, the United States, and other more welcoming countries.

But as Allon Sander wrote this past week in Ha’aretz, one of the first things former concentration camp prisoners did after being freed was to begin playing soccer. Sander writes, “Just one month after the establishment of [displaced persons camp] Landsberg, the Sports Organization for Former Polish Prisoners in the Camp demanded soccer balls and uniforms.” Soon after, the Jews had organized leagues and by 1947 there were 120 teams in Jewish leagues in Germany.

The idea that Jews would be interested in playing a game so soon after witnessing the worst horrors of the 20th century is a bit surprising. But, as Sander points out, Jews had been instrumental in spreading the gospel of soccer from the UK into Europe.

Sociologist Detlev Claussen claims that while conservatives opposed such development and supported athletic and gymnastic movements – team, elitist and non-competitive sports – the Jews happily accepted the British way. As such, the Jews were an engine for spreading sports throughout Europe.

Since surviving attempts to exterminate them in World War II, Jews have done much to try to reduce the suffering of other oppressed people (see, for example, the recent collaboration between the National Holocaust Museum and Google Earth to document the genocide in Darfur). But the state of Israel, where many Holocaust survivors settled, has done its share of oppressing its Arab neighbors. In soccer, as in life, bigotry among some in Israel is evident, as was documented by Rob Hughes in the International Herald Tribune. Hughes writes about Bnei Sakhnin, a team in Israel made up mostly of Israeli Arab players. The team is currently in the second division, but is looking likely to win promotion to the top division, where they have previously spent some time. During their previous time in Israel’s top league,

The welcome into Israeli’s soccer elite was not uniform. Jewish companies did not come forward to sponsor a team that mixes Arab and Jew and even Christian. The conservative extremists drawn to Beitar Jerusalem vented their bitterness by placing an advertisement on the Internet and in a daily newspaper. It suggested that Sakhnin’s presence was the “death” of Israeli soccer.

The Bnei Sakhnin squad

Bigotry is not confined to the Middle East, of course. In England, birthplace of soccer, controversy was generated this week when the BBC announced that it would have a female announcer at the game between Fulham and Blackburn. Some immediately came out against Jacqui Oatley’s appointment to the game.

Said Steve Curry, Sportsmail writer, “It is an insult to the controlled commentaries of John Motson, Mike Ingham and Alan Green that their domain is threatened by a new arrival whose excited voice sounds like a fire siren.”

Not wanted to be out-bigoted, former manager Dave Bassett said, “I am totally against it and everybody I know in football is totally against it. The problem is that everybody is too scared to admit it. I knew this would happen eventually. The world of football is so politically correct these days. I’m completely relaxed about women presenting football shows. Women like Clare Tomlinson are very good. But commentating is different. You must have an understanding of the game and the tactics and I think in order to do that you need to have played the game.”

In a retort to those against Oatley’s appointment simply because of her sex, Paula Cocozza of the Guardian wrote the following:

Why do the Bassetts and Currys in football permit themselves to say such things? Why, like sensible sexists in other walks of life, don’t they at least have the decency to exercise a little self-censorship rather than give vent to the chill draughts wafting through their heads? There is no acknowledgment of offence. Surely, having kicked racism out of football, and having now turned their attention to homophobia, the gentlemen at the Football Association will have to decide there is no place in their sport for sexism.

I agree whole-heartedly with Cocozza. But even while I revile the attitudes of Bassett, Curry, and those who share them, I wonder why they have such animosity toward female commentators. Granted, these are two football “experts” who have yet to turn their calendars past 1962, but where does their anger come from? Do they spew such vitriol when male announcers screech like fire sirens? Would they rail against Tommy Smyth’s inane babble if they had to put up with it in Champions League matches? I doubt it.

We in the US have not done much better on this front, though I have heard a few women calling college football and baseball games (if there are more than that, I’m not sure, as my sports-viewing diet is almost exclusively soccer). We do have the always-perky female sideline reporter, but I’m not sure if she is a boon or hindrance to gender equality. Veronica Paysee traveled to the 2002 World Cup to commentate for ESPN, but was reviled by soccer fans (see her profile on amiannoyingornot.com) because she knew nothing about soccer (she was, however, 2000 Miss Florida USA runner-up).

Veronica Paysee, recipient of a 67.46% annoying rating in 2003

The real question, of course, about announcers should be whether they are good at their job, no matter their sex. I have not heard Jacqui Oatley and am not sure if she is qualified to commentate on a Premier League match. But the fact that she is a woman should not impede her from taking on this new role. The sound of a female commentator is undeniably different from what we have been used to, but that does not make it inferior. Change is sometimes difficult to accept, especially in a beloved institution like football, but it is necessary in order to move forward as fans and as people.

Returning to the good ol’ US of A, I was struck by an article from the BBC which claimed Rangers want to set up a player exchange program with the LA Galaxy. The article quotes Rangers manager Walter Smith saying “With Beckham already signed, they will attract the cream of American kids who want to play alongside a superstar.” Smith, of course, would hope to attract these young American players to Rangers when they are further along in their careers.

I find Smith’s attitude both ignorant and offensive. It is ignorant because, unlike hierarchical European leagues, MLS has a system in place, like most American sports, to ensure parity among its teams. The best players in the US will not necessarily see the Galaxy as a “bigger” team, even with Beckham aboard, and want to move there, unlike Scotland, where Celtic and Rangers are the undisputed top two.

I also find Smith’s attitude offensive because, quite frankly, I don’t see much of a difference in skill level between the SPL and MLS. Rangers and Celtic are clearly a step above the other teams in Scotland, but the league overall is incredibly poor. Rangers and Celtic are good teams, but not great, and until they finally make the much-discussed move to the Premier League, I don’t see the benefit for American players in going there.

One of Ian Plenderleith’s columns at ussoccerplayers.com this week dealt with whether there is a difference in quality of play between English leagues below the Premier League and MLS. His conclusion (and keep in mind, he’s English):

In terms of atmosphere, tradition, passion and wit, attending a game in England, in the lower leagues at least, continues to be a more exciting and enjoyable game-day experience than it is in most MLS stadiums. But these established staples can not paper over the fact that many of these games are horrible to watch.

Plenderleith laments the “tedious, long ball game” that makes up much of English soccer outside of the Premier League. The Scottish have historically been known as more skillful than the English (their dribbling was renowned in the beginnings of the game), but anyone who’s watched an SPL game in the past ten years knows they’ve picked up the worst habits from south of Hadrian’s wall. Americans who move to Scotland to join Walter Smith’s Rangers would be making, in my opinion, a poor career choice.

Finally, a couple of articles on the influence of Spanish-speaking immigrants on soccer in this country. One article in the Washington Post deals with the increasing number of bilingual coaches for high school teams in Northern Virginia (an area with a large Latino immigrant population). Some American-born players have even learned Spanish in order to be able to communicate with their teammates. Stephen Dunlap, captain of Washington-Lee High School, said doing so “makes us relate to each other more. If we couldn’t understand each other but could play together, that would be enough. But being able to associate [with teammates] one more way is one more way to have a better team.”

And for my last article of the week, I have to give a plug to my mom, who brought it to my attention. The New York Times article, headlined “For Some Hispanics, Coming to America Also Means Abandoning Religion” deals with decreasing church attendance among Hispanic immigrants. One reason? They’re too busy playing soccer on Sundays!

Some quick hits to finish off:

• A unique way of trash-talking by Argentina and Brazil, as posted by the blog Too-Biased.
• The Voice of America says Zimbabwe’s successful U-18 team is bringing hope to the country. Strikes me as propaganda (from the VOA? No way!), but interesting nonetheless.
• Puma has signed up to provide uniforms Namibia. The blog Annansi Chronciles brings up the interesting point that Puma seems to doing a lot to make an imprint on the entire African continent (I remember noticing how many teams from the continent at the last World Cup were sponsored by Puma).
• It has nothing at all to do with soccer, but when the sport of Buzkashi popped up on not one, but two blogs I came across, I thought I should post the links. One blog describes the sport as “headless goat carcass polo.” Delicious.

Buzkashi players in action

Watching soccer in the US, I’ve recently begun to notice the rising number of African-Americans on the field. Soccer is moving into the mainstream in this country, and in no way is it more obvious than in the increasingly numbers of blacks you see playing the professional game here.

It turns out that the United States Soccer Federation (USSF) has made a concerted effort to recruit players from all backgrounds. As Mike Woitalla reported in Soccer America on April 6, the number of African players in USSF youth national teams has increased dramatically in recent years. He writes that nearly one fourth of the players in the U-17 residency program in Brandenton, Florida are African immigrants or sons of African immigrants. Many of these players grow up playing pick-up soccer in their neighborhoods, which helps them to develop what U-17 coach John Hackworth calls ”a love affair” with the ball.

Abdusalam Ibrahim, born in Ethiopia, now plays for FC Dallas and the USA U-17 national team

But while the numbers of black players are rising, the same cannot be said of African-American coaches. In an article titled Where are America’s Black Coaches? Woitalla points out that no African-American has ever managed an MLS team. In fact, a quick scan of the MLS website shows that there is only one (yes, one) black assistant coach (Chicago’s Denis Hamlett).

What is the solution to this problem? The NFL has recently begun requiring teams to interview at least one African-American candidate for each head coach position opening. And this past Super Bowl, of course, featured two black coaches for the first time ever, in a sport whose players are overwhelmingly African-American.

But in England, a country that has more than most to deal with racism in soccer, the statistics are nearly as poor for diversity in management. A recent BBC report showed that “[l]ess than 1% of senior coaching staff at the 92 league clubs are black – even though more than 20% of players are.” The article discusses the need to improve diversity in the coaching ranks, and the impediments to doing so. But, like in the US, there has been relatively little discussion of race in management, a problem that is a shameful on either side of the Atlantic.

One of the growing number of black players in MLS is Bouna Coundoul, who is now the Colorado Rapids’ starting goalkeeper after playing second fiddle to Joe Cannon. Robert Sanchez wrote an excellent profile of the Senegal-born goalkeeper, who came to the US at age 14. The jovial Coundoul “learned rudimentary English by watching Looney Tunes” but never completely lost touch with his home country. He often wears typically Senegalese clothing and eats his country’s fare, even though he now lives in Colorado.

Bouna Coundoul at home with a Senegalese meal

Coundoul is still an extremely devout Muslim and essentially cloisters himself in his apartment while not playing soccer, in order to avoid other women. He is waiting for his wife to join him from Senegal and staying home is his way of being a “good boy” in order to make “[his] wife … proud.” He also wakes up at 4:30 every day to pray, which is probably about the time when Mr. Potato Head is crashing his Aston Martin.

Bouna Coundoul was not the only Muslim soccer player who caught my interest this week. One came from Iraq, where a joint Sunni-Shiite TV/radio station began their broadcasts with a soccer game that featured Iraqis of mixed sectarian backgrounds. And the Washington Post’s Anthony Shadid reported on the protests in Lebanon which have “settled into a routine.” One example of the routine nature of the protests: “[p]rotesters divided into 11 teams and played their weekly soccer tournament in a deserted parking lot.”

In South America, president Nicanor Duarte sought to make himself the “Don Imus of Paraguay” this past week. At a recent speech, he offered an audience member’s “services” to a female cabinet minister who, according to Duarte, needed a romantic partner. Like Imus, Duarte has a long history of telling “jokes” but the Paraguayan president’s humor was honed in his previous career as a soccer commentator. Eric Wynalda in 2020, anyone?

Sticking with South America, the extremely polemical and soccer-hating blog Oil Wars does have some interesting pictures on Venezuela’s preparations for the Copa America. The stadiums that president Hugo Chavez is building are expensive, but nothing a little oil can’t finance (do SUV drivers know or care that they’re funding soccer stadiums in Venezuela?). In between pot shots about the Venezuelan opposition and soccer (“all this for some non-sense that barely qualifies as a sport”), the blogger does bring up the interesting point about whether it makes sense to spend huge amounts of money on stadiums in a country which has a poverty rate near 50%.

A stadium under construction in Venezuela

And some quick hits to finish off:

• I love reading about soccer in obscure places. The blog Ishtiba helped me to get my fix by describing the atmosphere in a recent game between Mauritius and Sudan (amazingly, not shown on ESPN). I love the pictures of the red, blue, yellow, and green Mauritian flags.
• I can never tell if Jose Mourinho is really as arrogant as he comes across or if he’s just acting as part of his notorious mind games, but his quotes are something else. Who Ate All the Pies did a round-up of his top 10 most arrogant quotes (the list could have been much longer, I’m sure). My favorite: “We are on top at the moment but not because of the club’s financial power. We are in contention for a lot of trophies because of my hard work.” Sure, Jose, sure.
• Another best of list came in this week’s The Knowledge from the Guardian. This week’s edition included strangest footballer names and they have some great ones. Naughty Mokoena would top most lists, but not one which also includes Brazilian Credence Clearwater Couto. Yes, really.
• And finally, Beckham may be the prettiest face in football but not after he’s helped you clean your rear end. Spice Boy’s face on TP sounds like a funny idea hatched in a bar around closing time, but in fact, as The Offside reported this week, it’s true.

One of my pet peeves is when people discuss American soccer as if it were monolithic. Yes, it is true that much soccer is played by wealthy, white kids in the suburbs, but if you travel to nearly any area with immigrants you will see soccer being played. Soccer is big in this country, but it is hidden to many people.

The popularity of soccer in the US was shown in the announcement that Mexico’s recent supercásico, Chivas vs. America, drew 4.3 million viewers, the most for a professional club match in 13 years. Yes, there are a lot of Mexicans in this country and yes, many Mexicans like soccer.

The Mexico vs. Ecuador friendly also drew the interest of a couple of media outlets. The San Francisco Chronicle sent reporter David White across the bay to check out the atmosphere at the game. White described the game as “a Latin-flavored block party, only the size of a suburban city, as 47,416 futbol fans — the overwhelming majority bathed in the green, white and red of Mexico … [who] came together to celebrate sport and culture.” NPR also got in on the act, with their reporter recording the sounds at the game.

Ecuadorian fans cheer their team on

The fact that Mexico can consistently draw huge crowds when playing in the US got me wondering if there are other countries that can do the same? Can Turkey draw a crowd when playing in Germany? Senegal when playing in France? Other ideas, anyone?

As many of you have probably noticed, I am particularly interested in stories related to conflict and, conversely, conflict resolution. Given the nature of the Middle East today, many stories of violence and soccer are coming from that region. The situation involving the British sailors currently being held by Iran has the potential to lead to even more conflict between the UK and the Iranians. Neither country has done a good job of reducing the tension and the Houston Chronicle reported that in Iran this week “some 60,000 soccer fans chanted ‘Death to Britain’ at a match in Tehran.”

Recent anti-British protests in Tehran

Iranian anger toward the UK is not new: the Anglo-Persian Oil Company (which has since become BP) was deeply resented by many in the Middle Eastern country in the mid-1950s, which led to the election of nationalist Mohammed Mossadegh. Mossadegh attempted to renegotiate what many Iranians saw as unfair contracts with the British oil company, which led to the CIA toppling him and reinstalling the Shah. The US may have been the one to overthrow the democratically-elected Mossadegh, but it was the British involvement that led to much of the anger toward the West in the first place. When, nearly 30 years later, the Iranian Revolution occurred, the US received the now well-known label of “Great Satan.” But less well known is that Britain is commonly referred to as “Little Satan.” This nickname was shouted again this week in the streets of Tehran along with the “Death to Britain.” I want to stop talking about Iraqi soccer players getting caught up in the violence wracking that country, but the stories just keep coming. This week, it was an eyewitness report from an Iraqi translator working for NPR who witnessed gunmen opening fire on teenagers playing soccer. Saleem Amer reports:

Two vehicles came and parked close to the parking lot. Four or five men left the vehicle, and we hear the noise, the shooting of the machine gun, it was so close, so loud and it was continuous. I start looking and they are shooting on the kids. Eight of the kids fell already on the ground. The guys kept shooting – they just wanted to make sure that everybody is dead.

There is a tiny bit of hope in the Middle East, even if it is constantly hidden under reports of horrible violence. When England traveled last week to Israel to humiliate themselves once again, several reporters went off the beaten path. Kevin Mitchell of the Guardian wrote a great piece about a soccer tournament which brins Palestianian and Israeli children together in sport. Mitchell harps on the theme that children have a “decency [that] disappears to once little boys start growing facial hair.” The tournament was “the football played by children behaving like grown men ought to.”

Reconciliation after conflict also popped up in a story about Didier Drogba winning the African Player of the Year award. After winning the award, the Chelsea striker went to the northern city of Bouake, home to a separatist movement in the country. While there, Drogba said

I have come here to offer you a golden ball, it’s the golden ball for the whole of the Ivory Coast. In June the whole Ivory Coast national team will be at Bouake for the match against Madagascar (in an African Nations Cup qualifier). 3 June will be a memorable day: it will be the victory for Ivory Coast football, the victory of the Ivory Coast people and quite simply there will be peace.

Didier Drogba shows off his award in Bouake

The effects of civil war can be horrendous. For evidence of this, one need only look back a little over 10 years to Rwanda. This week, a BBC article wrote of the lack of good players in the twenty-something age range because so many were killed during the 1994 genocide. Coach Michael Nees bemoans the fact that many of his potential players were killed, a blight on the Rwandan national team as well as the world that let it happen.

The Rwandan national team

More in the mold of a cold war, the low-level conflict in Korea since the separation into North and South has seen periodic attempts at reconciliation but no breakthrough as of yet. Another small step in what we can hope will lead to reunification occurred when the North Korean U-17 national team traveled to Jeju Island for a month-long training camp. Sadly, attempts by local residents to reach out to the team – including deliveries of of hallabong fruit and sushi-grade fish – were ignored. The media didn’t fare much better with the team avoiding local reporters. Said an official from the South Korean Football Association, “In their dictionary there may be no words for ‘media service’ or ‘photo session’.”

North Koreans, don’t you want some hallabong?

If the conflict between North and South Korea is comparable to a Cold War, what is the word to describe a conflict which doesn’t exist? Though there hasn’t been actual conflict over Macedonia, the name of that country is disputed. Some in Greece think that Macedonia should only be used to refer to the Greek province of the same name. A mention in the Christian Science Monitor’s “Reporters on the Job” segment had this soccer-related story that illustrates the difference.

For correspondent Nicole Itano, clashing views of history in the Balkans is not confined to the classroom (see story). The taxi driver she uses to get around Athens, for example, will order passengers to get out if they refer to the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYRM) as simply “Macedonia.” The reason: Greeks say that the kingdom of Alexander the Great, known as Macedonia, was part of present-day Greece. “Many Greeks are upset at what they see as an attempt by a Slavic country to appropriate his legacy for itself,” Nicole says.

During a Greek broadcast of a soccer match between England and Macedonia, Nicole says, the station superimposed the letters FYRM (pronounced “feerim”) to “correct” the scoreboard’s rendering of the teams: ENG vs. MAC. “That’s how touchy these issues are,” she says.

And finally, from Eastern Europe to Central Asia, where I found an blog that gives me the opportunity to use one of my favorite characters ever, Borat. That’s because Kazazkhstan beat Serbia in a Euro 2008 qualifier. Only one thing needs to be said about that.

Very nice!

Speaking of soccer results leading to national merrymaking, Peru’s U-17s qualified for the upcoming World Cup. According to the blog Journal Peru, the team’s results in the qualifying tournament were enough to send the country into uncontrolled ecstasy. Wolfy Becker writes that the team, which won only a single game in the tournament but qualified anyway, has become the darling of Peruvian media, being reported on constantly. And even if the team is unlikely to win the U-17 World Cup, they have proven one thing, says Becker: “Peru is already the world champion in celebrating!”

Peruvians welcome their U-17 national team back to the country

Back stateside, the MLS season starts next weekend. A couple of stories about the league came out this week. The Wall Street Journal took a look at the economic development of the league, saying that MLS has quietly (not including Beckham’s signing of couse) established a base for success. Meanwhile, Ian Plenderleith at US Soccer Players says that MLS must focus on improving the on-field product. Plenderleith quotes deputy commissioner Ivan Gazidis saying that the infrastructure is now established and that “the most important thing in MLS’ development over the next five years is going to be the game itself.” As someone who’s watched MLS since the days of the Wiz and the Clash, I agree 100%. I love MLS because it produces the national team players of the future, but the on-field product is often lacking. Now that the financial foundation appears in order, improving the game is vital.

And finally, for those interested in the just released Iranian movie Offside (which I discussed last week), I came across a website with fantastic pictures of female football fans (who are restricted from watching many games). Definitely worth a peek.