The year was 1990. The World Cup was in Italy. After a sour, defensive tournament filled with fouls and flops, West Germany took the title after an ugly "win" over Argentina, in a game noted more for ugliness than soccer. The winning goal came from a penalty given after what looked to be a complete flop by Jurgen Klinsmann. But nobody outside of Argentina really complained too much, because the Argentines had done nothing but foul and complain all game long.
20 years later, we had a virtual deja' vu. After a sour, defensive tournament filled with fouls and flops, Spain took the title after an ugly "win" over Holland, in a game during which more time was consumed by fouls and out-of-bounds than actual play. The winning goal came moments after a missed offside call, but nobody outside of Holland is complaining too much because the Dutch didn't really do anything besides foul and complain all game long.
After the 1990 tournament, FIFA made several minor rules changes in an effort to clean up the game. For a time, they worked. It's time for new measures to be taken. The current state of affairs is unacceptable. Yesterday's game highlighted the worst aspects of the "modern" soccer tournament.
First, let's look at the Netherlands, who apparently thought they could foul their way to a title. Prior to yesterday, the Dutch were mostly badgered about Arjen Robben's flopping and rolling on the ground after any challenge. After yesterday, the Dutch look like the dirtiest team in the world. Defensive midfielders Nigel DeJong and Mark Van Bommel, already known as "physical" players, seemed intent on trying to one-up each other with crazy rough tackles. During the first half, Van Bommel came flying in late on Spain's Iniesta and wiped him out from behind without getting anywhere near the ball. He received a yellow card, but the play really deserved a straight red. It seemed as if the Dutch were looking to take advantage of referee Howard Webb's understandable reluctance to toss anyone out of the final. Over half the team picked up (deserved) yellow cards for incessant fouling, and yet the men in orange also kept haranguing Webb for supposed favoritism. It was despicable (and Van Bommel deserves a category of his own. How he managed to avoid getting tossed is the greatest mystery of this tournament). When they actually tried to play soccer, which was rarely, the Dutch showed some sparks. Robben had a couple of prime chances himself but he couldn't finish them. Too bad the team was more interested in playing rugby than soccer.
But what about Spain? Normally, this is the point when pundits (like me) would praise Spain for being noble champions, deserved winners against negative soccer. But I can't do it. Spain was lousy. When the Dutch came out fouling, Spain responded by.... you guessed it, fouling and flopping. Just to show that the Dutch weren't the only ones capable of ugly ball, Carlos Puyol wiped out Robben on an early slide from behind. While they didn't maintain the same kind of fouling pace as the Dutch, the Spanish certainly did more than their fair share. Poor Howard Webb's arm almost fell off from showing so many yellow cards. And then came the flops. Andres Iniesta, who also scored the "winner," deserves an Oscar for his performance. He duped Webb into giving Dutch captain Giovanni Van Bronckhorst (one of the few Dutch players who was actually trying to play soccer) a yellow card by launching himself into the ground (with a half-pike and double twist) after brushing against the defender's hip at speed. He then "earned" a second yellow (and the associated red) for Dutch defender Johnny Heitinga by plunging into the turf after the latter man touched his shoulder for an instant. Greg Louganis never topped that dive. The lasting image of this final game is that of players surrounding referee Howard Webb and complaining about something or other. The players spent more time trying to play the referee than play soccer.
Some of you may be asking, "but what about the goal? Didn't Spain at least attack and win the game?" Yes, Spain scored, but they rarely attacked (at least in the soccer sense). As usual, Spain tried to win the game by putting everyone to sleep. They sat back and played a billion lateral passes around midfield. They only rarely pushed forward trying to score (and were immediately fouled whenever they did... sigh... can you tell how upset I am by the magnitude of this wretched disaster of a final?). At one point in the second half, Spain had passed the ball around just inside their own half for about a minute, and I counted how many Spanish players were still in their own half of the field. A full SEVEN Spanish players were back in their own half. Let me say that again. With the ball, and with good possession (I mean, it's not like it was a goal kick or something way back near their own goal), Spain still played with SEVEN men staying in their own half of the field (not counting the keeper). That's not "patient buildup," or "clever passing," it's cowardly crap defensive soccer. Had the Dutch been pressuring with more guys up front, maybe there's a reason to have 7 guys there. But the Dutch never pressed with more than a couple of guys up top. Spain was simply content to pass the ball around midfield with 7 guys against two. Whatever happened to trying to win the game?
And what about the winning goal? Iniesta (you can't say he wasn't prominent in this game) was clearly offside as the initial cross came into the box. It was aimed at him, and his presence obviously bothered the defender who whiffed the clearance. Yes, it's a judgment call as to whether he's considered "involved in active play", but I think it's pretty clear that Iniesta was "interfering with an opponent" and "gaining an advantage by being in that position." I don't blame Webb for missing the call, as the poor guy had a tough enough job on the day, but I think it should've been called just the same.
So the "Dirty Dutch" had no business winning this game, and the "Simulating Spanish" failed to show that they deserved the title... is there any way we can go back and declare the wildly entertaining and positively-played Uruguay/Germany 3rd-place match to be the retroactive final? No? Oh well.....
So what is to be done? If the lasting images of the 2010 World Cup are those of players screaming at an overwhelmed referee, surely there is something that can be done to make things better. Well, there are some things that can be done, if FIFA has the guts to do them.
CAPT. SAH's OFFICIAL SUGGESTIONS TO FIFA:
- Create a new official position, that of the goal judge. Too many times we've seen hugely controversial decisions whether or not goals have been scored being determined by referees and linesmen who are 30 yards away. Take a tip from hockey and use goal judges. One official should be added next to each goal, with the primary purpose being to flag whether or not the ball has crossed the goal line. That takes some burden off the linesmen, who can concentrate more on the tricky offsides calls, and gives the referee a pair of eyes right next to the goal so he doesn't have to make judgment calls from 30 yards away. Just having goal judges would've almost certainly eliminated the controversy from the Germany-England game in this World Cup. Also, the goal judges could be another pair of eyes to watch for the increasing off-the-ball nonsense that goes on, particularly on free kicks and corner kicks.
- Use instant replay. No, not during the games, as has been such a point of contention with folks, but after them. The biggest problem with the rules of soccer is that they expect the participants to have at least some sense of honor. Sadly, that is no longer the case (if it ever really was). How many times during this world cup did we see guys rolling around holding their faces after getting nicked on the foot? How many times did we see guys flop to the ground after getting brushed? And conversely, how many times did we see guys callously plow through opponents with nothing more than a (possible) yellow card resulting? How many times did we see wrestling matches on corner kicks that made the WWE look tame? Even the best referee of all time couldn't possibly detect all the faking, all the cheap shots, and all the ... well... CHEATING that is going on in the modern game. It's a terrible shame that it has come to this, but when players are more concerned with screaming at the ref than playing soccer, something has to change. The answer is to get a little draconian, and TV instant replay can be the tool. After every big match, there should be a review of the game by officials, looking specifically for dirty play. Any time a player is caught faking something (and I'm talking about the obvious stuff, like holding your face after getting a bump in the chest), he must be immediately suspended for two games. Players that consistently violate the rules with violent play or incessant fouling should be suspended for two games. Yes, it's impossible to make this completely objective, but I think a decent attempt could be made. I fail to see how any independent viewer could watch footage of this World Cup and not believe that Nigel De Jong and Mark Van Bommel deserve an extra two-game suspension. They obviously have little concern for the rules of the game.
Obviously, there is no 100% solution, but these two additions could make a tremendous impact if properly executed. And for us fans, what is needed is to hold the rascals responsible in our own way. Teams that play crappy defensive soccer should not be supported. Teams that feature cheats should not be subsidized with our ticket money. Eventually, only the bottom line will make a difference with the powers-that-be, and then perhaps we can have tournaments and titles featuring soccer, not performance art.
SAH
One exciting part of seeing Manchester United is the opportunity to see some world-famous players live and in-person. Ryan Giggs is a long-time stalwart of the team and has been hailed as a great player for years. He has never been able to make the big splash on the World Cup scene because he plays for Wales, but his achievements with Manchester United are fantastic. Even now at age 37, he plays with skill and flair. 
And here they are 5 minutes later....
Succulent describes it best. These tasty morsels are just perfect. I've been to different Jack Stack's around KC probably a dozen times. I've never regretted the choice. This time, however, something unusual happened. As it was my first time in the Plaza Jack Stack location, I was looking around at everything like a rubbernecking tourist. A kitchen manager spotted me and invited Lacie and I to come back and take a look at their gear. He gave us a very short but fascinating look behind the scenes of the restaurant. I learned some of their basic techniques that I will be trying out the next time I try to smoke a brisket in my backyard grill. Of course, they have a little more "extensive" smoker.....
This beast was but one of three wood-fired industrial smokers this location employed. A note to the uninitiated: Real BBQ uses wood. Period. There should be no ovens at a BBQ joint, unless they're used for side dishes like cornbread. No gas, no electric... just pure Hickory wood.
