posted by Wozzy Bear @ 3:53 PM
Welcome to the home of Wozzy Bear.
I'm a mid-twenty-something man born and raised in the good old Garden State. Remaining true to my home state and my family heritage, I attended Rutgers University and graduated in October of 2003 with a degree in Journalism and Mass Media. I think it's safe to say that I'm a little obsessed with sports. Very simply, I'm the guy that emphatically laments at the screen/radio when my teams are playing like garbage (Mets, Jets, Scarlet Knights, Devils, Knicks). Some people contend that they cannot hear me, and my incessant yelling has absolutely no effect on the outcome of the game. Well, I've got news for the naysayers. They CAN hear me, and my obsessive hooting and hollering DOES have an effect on the game. With that said, I also thoroughly enjoy discussions involving politics, music and entertainment.
27 Comments:
wow...a whole lot went into that post.
great world cup coverage.
Note bottom of post "Tournament Recap to Follow."
Yesterday was my first day back to work from vacation, so naturally, I did not have enough time to write an entire recap. Hopefully I can get to that in the next couple of days...
Also note, I have completely scrapped the "Fighting Cock's" updates....I can't even bring myself to write about us anymore...The team is in shambles with several players flat out quitting the seaosn on us...
Do one final "Cocks" update and explain.
Italy vs. France to me is like a Mets vs. Red Saux World Series. Got to root for the less of the two evils.
I'll still have the '94 World Cup...1-0 Ireland over Italy.
A few interesting thoughts on why Americans do not care about soccer...
New York Newsday put it best....."And then there's all the whinning. European soccer players seem to spend most of the game writhing in fake agony and pointing out potential rules violations to the refs. Whether it takes place on a soccer pitch or at a meeting of the United Nations, Americans don't find that kind of behavior endearing."
The New York Times had this to say...."The real question isn't why Americans don't care about the World Cup, it's why the rest of the world does. Maybe they love soccer because they haven't been given better alternatives. With time and experience I've come to percieve the truth, soccer just isn't that much fun to watch."
I do have to say though, if the American team wasn't such a San Francisco Abortion, more Americans would have gotten into it.
Reminds me of College Football. Very passionate fans (including myself, and it helps when you go to a major university. You have a rooting interest, if you went to PSU or Rutgers, while if you went to Kean or something like that, you still might like college football, but probably aren't as passionate about it as somebody that went to Notre Dame or Michigan.
If America had a good team, people would have a rooting interest in the World Cup.
That and the whole soccer players being a bunch of pussies you take dives all the time. The new FIFA rule should be if you embarrass yourself, your family, and the sport by diving like that, you are banned for life.
Yes soccer players take dives all the time. But did you happen to watch the NBA Finals this year at all? Dwayne Wade might as well play soccer. Sure its not as overdone and dramatic as soccer players, but how much different is taking a dive from purposely throwing yourself down the lane to purposely get a foul call?
I'll explain to you all really quick why soccer players take dives most of the time. Notice I said MOST of the time. When you are running with the ball in what amounts to an all out sprint and someone lightly steps on your ankle or impedes your progress in some other way, you obvious are going to slow down. When you slow down, the ball does not slow down and can then be taken away by someone from the other team. So players embellish a little (sometimes a lot) so that the ref will call a foul and they can ensure they keep possession. Its as simple as that. Is it an honest thing to do? Probably not. But its part of the game and as far as I could see, pretty much every European team in the WC were very big fans of taking dives.
I love how people talk about how Italy takes so many dives. The 2 most fouled players in the WC were Figo and C. Ronaldo, both from Portugal. C. Ronaldo is probably the most guilty of all the divers when he purposely took at least one dive inside the box per game to try to get a penalty shot. Fortunately, most of his dives inside the box weren't called but a few were.
I also enjoyed all the people saying they were rooting for France because "Italy takes too many dives" when if they bothered to watch the France-Portugal game, the would have seen that the only reason why France won the game was because Thierry Henry got "fouled" inside the box which lead to a PK for France which was their only goal. On review, Henry wasn't even touched by the defender, yet he went down holding his face like someone just shot him.
Personally, I'd rather watch soccer than most NBA games. Unfortunately, we don't get very much coverage of the sport here in the U.S.
In the NBA, it's mostly one on one matchups, whereas in soccer, you have some of the most finely tuned athletes running up and down a 120 yard field for ninety minutes. Meanwhile, the footwork is incredible, and the passing and shot making ability at the international level is astounding.
While it could never beat baseball or the NFL in my view, I rather enjoy soccer and wish it was more popular in this country.
Mass genocide is the most exhausting activity one can engage in, outside of soccer.
Oh cmon....I know many Americans don't enjoy it, but it has to be a pretty darn entertaining if the REST of the world generally considers soccer the most popular sport.
We're the ones that see it differently...It's like baseball and football everywhere else...
wow, ectropy sounds like a bitter italian fan who is mad that people dont like italy because they take lots of dives.
i already showed wozzy the web site that i found. basically, it shows that the italians had the most dives and the most fake injuries of any team in the world cup.
obviously u have to expect some level of dives from european teams but italy tends to go far and above what other teams do. also portugal was up there in terms of dives and fakes. on the other hand, the us was last or close to last in both categories. that shows that americans either dont believe in that style of play or care not to engage in tom foolery.
the only team in the final four worth rooting for in my opinion was germany. they played straight up, were entertaining to watch and did it with skill, not acting.
as for popularity of the sport and games, i enjoyed a good many a game this and every world cup, but watching a top team like england was like watching paint dry. they are ranked in the top 5 in the world yet they play the least entertaining style in the world. takes away from enjoyment
- Plenty of diving on the German side as well. They all do it.
- I snet Ectropy the italian video when you sent it to me.
- Bill Simmons had this to say about soccer: "If anyone wants to make the case for an English premier team for me, e-mail me. I might make the leap. Soccer's growing on me, you don't have to pay attention, it's easy to follow, no sideline reporters, no commercials, no annoying announcers, the crowds are fantastic ... there's a lot to like."
the best part about soccer has got to be the 45 minutes of non stop gameplay each half. i mean what is worse than having commercial delays after every change of possession in football or baseketball or baseball. soccer gets it right by having the commercials at halftime and after the game. granted if u dont know what your team jersey looks like you wont be able to find the team name because its so small compared to the countless ads on the jerseys, but thats a small price to pay.
i would have to say that the american announcers for soccer were downright awful. john harkes was good because he did nothing but call out the portugese for being wimps and taking tons of dives, but besides that the rest seemed like they never saw a soccer match in their lives.
Wow tomjoad, I'm actually in agreement with you today. I know you and I differ when it comes to Italy and I think you are a little bit unfair when talking about them diving. But enough of that.
This world cup totally turned my opinion of the German team around. I love that Podolski kid and mark my words, we'll be hearing a lot about him in South Africa in 4 years. That team showed a ton of heart and gave the German people the most German-pride since the 1940's. I was happy to see them win third place especially since they did it all on heart and pure determination.
I could care less about the ads on the jerseys. They have no commercials during games except at halftime which is a concept I wish other sports would employ. Nothing pisses me off more than those rare occassions when they are late coming back from a commercial break during a football game which causes you to miss the first play. Most people, even with American sports, don't look for the team name or logo on the jersey to identify the team. Most people do it by color or color combination.
And you are absolutely correct about the American announcers. They sounded confused and new very little about the sport. I ended up watching most of the games on the spanish channel. Had no idea what they were saying but it was better than listening to mindless bullshit during the games.
Yeah, to echo the sentiment concerning the atrocity that was the American announcers during the World Cup. A couple examples from the final:
- Just minutes after France was awarded a penalty kick on one of the worst calls in the tournament, the U.S. announcer says "I think the officiating in this game thus far has been flawless." I wanted to jump through the TV and choke the guy. Was he watching the same replays we were? Did he not see that Mattarazzi never touched the guy? Sheesh!
- The U.S. announcer mentioned that there would be a penalty shootout if neither team scored during the two time periods, no less than 37 times.
And on a final note, Marcelo Balboa should never be allowed near a microphone EVER again. It's a wonder the U.S. soccer team never played well in the world cup when he was on the team. It was likely a result of the fact thathe's an idiot. He was the absolute epitmoy of an announcer stating the obvious at every opportunity.
God bless Telemundo. I had no clue what they were sying, yet it was infinitely superior to watching the games on ESPN or ABC.
This is fucking ridiculous. FIFA is holding a whole investigation about what happened in the Matterazzi/Zidane incident. I have a HUGE problem with this. Yes Matterazzi said something that provoked Zidane. But how is the fact that Zidane head-butted the guy in the chest overlooked?
My problem with this is that if the role was reversed, if Matterazzi head-butted Zidane after Zidane made a rude comment, everyone would be talking about what an asshole Matterazzi was for doing a despicable act. No one would care what Zidane said and it would be an open and shut case. End of story. This whole thing is because Zidane is an internationally famous player and I think that's pretty bullshit. Just look at Rooney getting red carded for stepping on the guys groin. I'm sure the guy did something to piss off Rooney but there is no investigation at all.
Agreed....Matterazzi made a comment about Zidane's mother. Hello? Mom comments are ALWAYS legal amongst men, especialyl on the field of sport. I'm sure there are worse comments made...
I wish I would have bet money on this. But even I didn't believe somebody could suffer this much from BDS.(Bush Derangement Syndrome)
Pat Morrison of the LA Times actually blames President Bush for for the Zidane headbutt.
-- NOW WE KNOW why France’s team captain lost his cool in the World Cup finals and France lost the trophy to Italy. Terrorism.
Zinedine Zidane, who is of French and Algerian ancestry, head-butted an Italian player who insulted him. Although Zidane in an interview Wednesday would not say what words provoked him, a lip reader hired by the Times of London claims Marco Materazzi called Zidane “the son of a terrorist whore.’’ That’s pure trickle-down politics. From the White House to the soccer pitch, “terrorist” has “cooties” and “your mother wears combat boots” flat beat as the top playground potty-mouth slur for the 21st century.
Who’s surprised? The Bush administration has been scattering the word like ticker tape on a Manhattan parade. Old McDonald left the farm for the NSA, and now it’s here a terrorist, there a terrorist, everywhere a terrorist.--
What a fucking moonbat!
That is a pretty large stretch. however, the Bush Admin. does throw the "T" word around quite a bit. It's about all they have left....
Won't be any Bush admin. support from this guy. His Admin. is a complete joke at this point. At this point, the only thought worse than the current group on Capitol Hill is who might be in office next!
The Bush Administration uses the word terrorist correctly at least unlike the radical left mainstream media who call the Palestinian animals, "peaceful freedom fighters."
Hopefully Americans realize now we deserve better. We suffered through 8 years of Billy Clinton who was the worst President in American history, and now we have President Bush.
The only thing scarier would have been a John Kerry Presidency.
I agree with you on the next election. It is absolutely frightening that some people consider Hillary as a viable Presidential candidate.
Anyway, back to soccer. I see we got the German coach to head up team America now.
Clinton was certainly not the worst President of all time. Not saying he was the best, but Ulysses S. Grant, Warren G. Harding, Andrew Johnson, Franklin Pierce, William Henry Harrison and James Buchanan are widely considered some of the worst of all time.
William Jefferson Clinton is never mentioned in the bottom rankings of Presidents. He's often placed somewhere in the middle, and sometimes in the top 10, depending on who you talk to.
Bush II on the other hand has managed one of the lowest approval ratings in the history of the Presidency. That's over 200 years worth of leaders, so it's quite a large sample.
As for his father, Bush I, he is widely considered one of the top 10 President's in terms of rankings, and I tend to agree with that assessment - much better than his doltish son.
Clinton was certainly not the best, but to call Bill Clinton the "worst President in American history," is a capricious overstatement. Not even analysts that despise Clinton rank him as the lowest of all time.
- As for Team USA, if they can convince Jurgen Klinsmann to take over, it would be the equivalent of hiring Lou Pinella to manage your baseball team. He was a tremendous player who has also enjoyed great success as a coach.
hey gut. im bored down at the shore house, so i decided to give this blog thing a shot, plus the fact that it seems with our conflicting schedules this is a good way to keep in touch. Anyway, i had a good time watching the cup. i'm a fan of soccer and watch it even in between world cups, when the rest of the u.s. jumps on the bandwagon. I dont agree with the dives all of the time, however i realize it is part of the sport and just doesnt agree with our american ideology. as far as the clinton comment, i think its pretty foolish to call him the worst president of all time. i agree with your worst of list, however grant has a bad wrap, partly because of his agressive but necessary decisions during the war as a general. anyway we all know how bad our current president is, a man who would rather take the advice of a pope before the rationale of his contemporaries is a scary thing. but as long as there are more redneck christian soldiers out there then open minded free thinkers, this is the crap we have to deal with.
Thanks for the comments....Who this be?
Also...Check out the NY Jets blog...It's linked on the right side of the blog. Jack and I work on that onje together...
http://2jetsfans.blogspot.com/
I would like to point out how foolish it is to claim that President Bush follows the advice from the Pope.
The Pope is the head of the Roman Catholic Church. President Bush is not a Roman Catholic, never has been a Roman Catholic, and has never claimed to be a Roman Catholic. He also clearly does not follow the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church or its leader, Pope Benedict XVI.
It would be an interesting choice though as to whose "advice' to follow. The Pope, or the Chinese who gave you all that illegal money, as what happened in the previous administration.
Political Correctness is funny, you can call people from the south rednecks and use the term "Christian" like its a bad thing, yet, it is un-pc to call out the New England liberals as communists and/or socialist hypocrites.
There should be a list for worst ex-Presidents of all-time, and it would only contain one, Jimmy Carter. There has never been any other ex-Pres who has done more to try to destroy the United States as Jimmy Carter has. What an abortion.
"Ugly" - While you are correct in pointing out that Bush is not catholic, thus he does not look to the Pope or the Catholic church for advice, I think the point was geared more towards Bush's "religious" influences.
Bush may not be Catholic, but he clearly allows his religious beliefs to infringe upon his decsion-making, thus defeating the purpose of the notion of "seperation of Church and State." Catholic or Protestant, it doesn't really matter. Bush clearly cannot distinguish between politics and religion.
True, he is a religious man, but I have a few thoughts on this.
There is no such thing as the "separation of Church and State" in the United States Constitution. Those words do not exist.
In the United States we have the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution.("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.") Now, nowhere in it, does it say that a President cannot use his conscious to help make decisions, including if his conscious is guided by religion, specifically Christianity.
People do things on what they decide to be fair and just. For this President and many others before him, he allows his religious beliefs to help him make his decisions.
It is perfectly fine to disagree with a particular politician on specific issues, as I do all the time. However, thanks to the 1st Amendment, all citizens, including the President of the United States are free to use any thought process they choose to help them make decisions.
If Congress was attempting to make Islam the national religion and tried to pass laws requiring all citizens to pray to Allah multiple times a day or they will be jailed. Then we would have problems.
As it stands now, has before, and always will, the American President will try to push their political agendas on what they consider to be the best for the American citizens. While they might differ slightly on their policies, all of them took into account what they believed to be morally correct.
I'm not liking how I am coming across as defending President Bush. I think Mort Zuckerman put my feelings into words on the current state of our government, when on the Colbert Report he said this....(paraphrase) "I disagree with just about everything President Bush has done, but there is one thing I know more than that.....John Kerry would have been a lot worse."
There is no problem with sharing your feelings/opinions, but I would be reimss of I did not point out that this statement is based purely on speculation:
"I disagree with just about everything President Bush has done, but there is one thing I know more than that.....John Kerry would have been a lot worse."
We'll never know IF John kerry would have been worse, because he was never elected President. However, we DO know that the Bush adminstration has been a failure, because we've watched it unfold.
wow....a world cup tourney discussion morphed into US Politics...
what happened to the recap? I've been waiting over a month for this?!?!?
Sorry pal....All work and no play...there are a ton of posts I'd love to write and play with, but time/work does not afford me that opportunity.....
Post a Comment
<< Home