Topic: The Quadrennial Global Round-Ball Extravaganza (Read 44946 times)

scarred · « **Reply #100 on:** 14 Jun 2010, 12:48 »

Quote from: Slick on 14 Jun 2010, 12:14

Are those shopped? I do not know.

no way

pwhodges · « **Reply #101 on:** 14 Jun 2010, 13:16 »

It's just so amazing the way that the people in the crowd froze so completely between the photos!

a pack of wolves · « **Reply #102 on:** 14 Jun 2010, 13:22 »

Aw, Italy got back into it through a corner and it ended 1-1. Good result for Paraguay, but I imagine they'll be gutted knowing they were close to taking that.

David_Dovey · « **Reply #103 on:** 14 Jun 2010, 20:48 »

So I was reading some articles this morning and apparently a whole bunch of AIDS/Malaria/etc. charities are using the World Cup as an opportunity to reach out to and educate many of South Africa's poor and oh hey also football has long been a vector for revolution in Africa, and at it's base nature football is an egalitarian sport which has allowed upward mobility for many poor folks who may well have died young otherwise and well jeez it's like there's two sides to this story!

JD · « **Reply #104 on:** 14 Jun 2010, 22:06 »

oh so Khar was wrong

at least partially

scarred · « **Reply #105 on:** 14 Jun 2010, 22:17 »

i thought we all knew that

JD · « **Reply #106 on:** 14 Jun 2010, 22:22 »

yes but look evidence

Inlander · « **Reply #107 on:** 14 Jun 2010, 22:22 »

No, Khar was right, at least in his initial post. Dovey is also right.

This is not difficult people, keep up.

scarred · « **Reply #108 on:** 14 Jun 2010, 22:23 »

oh right i forgot this is a conversation with actual merit instead of just khar yelling at people for ~~watching professional sports~~ listening to lady gaga

Inlander · « **Reply #109 on:** 14 Jun 2010, 22:27 »

It's Khar making a very good point which is really awkward and which none of us want to think about because it makes us uncomfortable so instead of trying to deal with the complexity of our emotions we just say "Ah, fuck it" and get angry at him and then he gets angry back at us and then no-one's talking to each other 'cause we're all too busy sulking.

scarred · « **Reply #110 on:** 14 Jun 2010, 22:40 »

i think apathy has to figure in there somewhere. i mean i'm not watching the world cup but i do watch american football religiously even though i'm aware that way too much money is poured into it as an industry.

then again you could say the same thing about hollywood, etc.

basically the world is fucked up and i'm too lazy to change it?

Elizzybeth · « **Reply #111 on:** 14 Jun 2010, 22:50 »

I'm not apathetic, just overwhelmed.

scarred · « **Reply #112 on:** 14 Jun 2010, 23:12 »

that article is pretty spot-on actually

Eris · « **Reply #113 on:** 14 Jun 2010, 23:42 »

That article puts into words what I have been trying to express for a while now.

David_Dovey · « **Reply #114 on:** 14 Jun 2010, 23:53 »

Yeah I made that post in a bit of a rush so I didn't get to expand on it heaps but the basic idea is that the bullshit that accompanies events like this and the Olympics are more a symptom of the generally awful way human beings treat each other due to power differentials and it doesn't matter if it's over sport or, well, any other large corporate sponsored cultural gathering and to write the whole thing off as some sort of symbol for everything horrible in the world (rank capitalism, mob mentality et. al.) takes some pretty willful denial of the way football's appeal to people of all social strata is being used for good.

I also didn't get to point out that the way Khar is saying that getherings of football fans is like Nuremberg or something when metal and industrial bands overtly conjure fascist imagery all the fucking time oh yeah and also-

Barmymoo · « **Reply #115 on:** 15 Jun 2010, 00:02 »

I don't give two hoots about the football but if someone blows one of those plastic horns near me tomorrow night it will be thoroughly stomped by my five-inch stilettos.

KvP · « **Reply #116 on:** 15 Jun 2010, 01:13 »

Thomas Friedman is kind of a joke. Maybe the second least successful NYT editorialist, behind Ross Douthat. Anyway, the ineffectiveness of modern protest was one of the things that Baudrillard predicted would happen back when people actually considered it effective (post-'68 Paris). These days protests are really not particularly challenging to powerful entities nor are they particularly well-suited to gaining public support, and they are fully accepted (and expected) within social discourse.

The Simpsons and Football.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #117 on:** 15 Jun 2010, 04:52 »

Quote from: David_Dovey on 14 Jun 2010, 23:53

I also didn't get to point out that the way Khar is saying that getherings of football fans is like Nuremberg or something when metal and industrial bands overtly conjure fascist imagery all the fucking time

There's a difference between using fascist imagery, actually being a fascist, and engaging in behaviours which chime with fascist style of aesthetics, which is what the World Cup and the Olympics do. They are not designed to set up a thousand year reich, but they could very easily be incorporated into one: just look what Leni Reifenstahl did to the Olympics. Also I think it's pretty rich to say that football is awesome because it leads a very small amount of people out of poverty. By that metric the national lottery is pure socialism. Who gives a shit about the way the vast majority of players are duped by false hope into spending money week in, week out on tickets that they maybe can't even afford. The great thing about NSBM is that the nazis would have hated it; it's anti-social, degenerate art and half the bands are Slavs anyway. True fascist spectacle is about fitting in, about erasing your individuality as much as possible by losing yourself in the euphoria of mindless mass experience, which is why I bought the whole thing up.

Fascism, or whatever it will be called next, won't come round again wearing jackboots and waving a swastika. You just have to look at some genuine examples of fascist type movements arising outside of Europe, like Lyndon LaRouche since the 70's. He's an arch fascist: conspiracist, anti-semitic, elitist, mystic, industrialist and so on, but you'll never hear him mention Mein Kampf or even Mussolini. If you reduce the discussion of actual, perhaps even accidental, occurences of fascist aesthetics and modes of being in modern society to HERP DERP NO SWASTIKA'S SO NOT FACIST, or even if you actually believe that fascism is just a more extreme form of nationalism (it's not at all), then you are refusing to learn from history and it would be pretty fucking dreadful to have to repeat that particular bit, especially.

David_Dovey · « **Reply #118 on:** 15 Jun 2010, 04:56 »

Quote from: KharBevNor on 15 Jun 2010, 04:52

Also I think it's pretty rich to say that football is awesome because it leads a very small amount of people out of poverty.

I wasn't saying that, I was saying you were taking it too far in the opposite direction. Shades of grey and whatnot.

Quote from: KharBevNor on 15 Jun 2010, 04:52

True fascist spectacle is about fitting in, about erasing your individuality as much as possible by losing yourself in the euphoria of mindless mass experience, which is why I bought the whole thing up.

Once again, that sounds like a negatively slanted retelling of the way a lot of metalheads describe the feeling of being part of a huge pit.

Edit: Just to make it absolutely clear, I don't think Wacken is any more fascistic than the average soccer match. I'm trying to point out your bias and the way you can read these sorts of things into anything, if you decide beforehand that you hate it cos it's a horrible tool of oppression etc etc.

a pack of wolves · « **Reply #119 on:** 15 Jun 2010, 05:52 »

Quote from: Elizzybeth on 14 Jun 2010, 22:50

I'm not apathetic, just overwhelmed.

That article really is full of nonsense. For a start there wasn't a lack of different issues in an earlier period, the writer's just choosing to remember a few big ones. Then there's the idea that there's simply nothing that can be done except writing an email to somebody or taking part in an insufferably polite protest. Er, how about direct action? Strikes? Sabotage? Site occupations? Blockades? You'd think these were new and novel ideas instead of being over a hundred years old. The problem isn't the over-saturation of news in the digital age, it's that if something might work it's also going to be scary and very possibly illegal.

David_Dovey · « **Reply #120 on:** 15 Jun 2010, 05:56 »

I'm not entirely sure that the writer is saying that there were less issues back in the day, more that the average person was exposed to less, and those that they were exposed to were of more immediate impact.

At least, that's how I read it. It is entirely possible that the writer did actually think less bad/scary/controversial stuff was happening a few decades ago and that it has exponentially increased in the past ten years for reasons unseen. Either way you are right in pointing out that the article is a load of old tosh. I'm just being pedantic (what's new).

scarred · « **Reply #121 on:** 15 Jun 2010, 06:04 »

Quote from: David_Dovey on 15 Jun 2010, 05:56

I'm not entirely sure that the writer is saying that there were less issues back in the day, more that the average person was exposed to less, and those that they were exposed to were of more immediate impact.

No that's exactly what the article was saying.

Quote from: a pack of wolves on 15 Jun 2010, 05:52

The problem isn't the over-saturation of news in the digital age, it's that if something might work it's also going to be scary and very possibly illegal.

Yeah well excuse us if we aren't trying to line up for jail

a pack of wolves · « **Reply #122 on:** 15 Jun 2010, 07:39 »

Hey, the idea of a night in the cells scares me witless, never mind actually serving time. But you can't change anything without an element of personal risk. The problem with that article is that it isn't asking "what can we do" it's asking "what can we do that will have no negative repercussions on my life whatsoever"? Civil rights activists literally did line up for jail, they knew the jails couldn't hold them all and that it cost a fantastic amount to imprison so many, but they wouldn't have got anywhere if they weren't willing to put themselves on the line like they did.

Quote from: David_Dovey on 15 Jun 2010, 05:56

I'm not entirely sure that the writer is saying that there were less issues back in the day, more that the average person was exposed to less, and those that they were exposed to were of more immediate impact.

I'm not sure the average person was exposed to less. Sure, given infinite time the internet would allow for more issues to come to someone's attention, but I doubt most people have the time to consume more news than people did when they just had newspapers, radio and television.

Anyway, back to the football. FUCK YES NEW ZEALAND! Sure Slovakia weren't playing at full potential but NZ worked hard, played well as a team, didn't give up when they went behind and totally deserved their equaliser. And what a time to do it, just in the dying seconds of the game!

pwhodges · « **Reply #123 on:** 15 Jun 2010, 08:19 »

Quote from: a pack of wolves on 15 Jun 2010, 07:39

I'm not sure the average person was exposed to less.

Yes, we were. Even though there were more papers and we listened to the radio, the pace of reporting was slower even in times of crisis; there was much less emphasis on foreign or world-wide stories as well. Doesn't mean we couldn't get worried - about nukes, for instance (think Cuba, or the CND's glory days) - but there wasn't the ubiquity of concern that is prevalent these days.

valley_parade · « **Reply #124 on:** 15 Jun 2010, 10:23 »

So um how terrible were Portugal?

blanktom · « **Reply #125 on:** 15 Jun 2010, 11:16 »

Shit, for the 2nd time since the World Cup started, I've come to this thread to get a nice update of whats going on in the football and ended up reading about the politics behind it all.

Please go and do this in the Discuss! sub-forum?

KharBevNor · « **Reply #126 on:** 15 Jun 2010, 11:55 »

Why don't you take your whingeing to the Qc discussion subforum, where such sentiments belong.

KvP · « **Reply #127 on:** 15 Jun 2010, 13:03 »

Quote from: scarred on 15 Jun 2010, 06:04

Yeah well excuse us if we aren't trying to line up for jail

Haha, moderates.

amok · « **Reply #128 on:** 15 Jun 2010, 13:16 »

Quote from: blanktom on 15 Jun 2010, 11:16

Shit, for the 2nd time since the World Cup started, I've come to this thread to get a nice update of whats going on in the football and ended up reading about the politics behind it all.

Please go and do this in the Discuss! sub-forum?

North Korea just scored an incredible goal against Brazil.

This is literally more interesting than every other word on this page.

Fair play to them too, they forced Brazil to score two inch-perfect goals to beat them. Nothing inferior was getting through.

Basically DPRK are one of the best teams we've seen so far, in terms of organisation at least.

KvP · « **Reply #129 on:** 15 Jun 2010, 13:25 »

Well, yeah. They may actually be playing as if their lives depended on it in a literal sense. I remember the stories of Iraq's soccer team back when it was being run by one of Saddam's sons.

amok · « **Reply #130 on:** 15 Jun 2010, 13:26 »

I doubt they're quite Iraq levels of "win or else" but yeah quite possibly.

Hope that match marked an upturn in quality and not just a blip anyway.

edit: heh you put in the Iraq bit as I typed. Great minds/fools etc.

the_pied_piper · « **Reply #131 on:** 15 Jun 2010, 13:31 »

I was really impressed with North Korea in that game, not just because of their great organisation but because every player was comfortable with the ball at either foot. So many times you see great players waste chances because they won't use their weak foot but the Koreans didn't have that problem at all.

FruitKat · « **Reply #132 on:** 15 Jun 2010, 20:43 »

No one has said anything about New Zealand NOT LOSING. Pretty incredible.

est · « **Reply #133 on:** 15 Jun 2010, 22:22 »

Pretty fucking great, Kat. I was watching it last night & got pretty excited about them scoring at the last minute and the dude whipped his shirt off and was booked for doing so but didn't care because OMG HE JUST SCORED A GOAL AND THEY DIDN'T LOSE IN THE WORLD CUP WOOOOOOO

Patrick · « **Reply #134 on:** 16 Jun 2010, 00:54 »

Everybody on the North Korean team is getting executed for losing to those other folks.

Inlander · « **Reply #135 on:** 16 Jun 2010, 08:18 »

Wait, what? Spain 0 - Switzerland 1 at the hour mark?

Damn, shouldn't have been watching that shitty State of Origin match I recorded. Let's see how this pans out!

Thomas Edison · « **Reply #136 on:** 16 Jun 2010, 08:30 »

Pretty close from that freekick, but Spain seem to be playing with very little oomph near the box.

Inlander · « **Reply #137 on:** 16 Jun 2010, 08:48 »

Oh god, Switzerland have been defending really well but now there's five minutes of stoppage time and I quite like Spain but I really really hope the Swiss can hold on.

Inlander · « **Reply #138 on:** 16 Jun 2010, 08:53 »

THEY'VE DONE IT!

Unbelievable. And after all, a World Cup just isn't a World Cup without one massive upset.

amok · « **Reply #139 on:** 16 Jun 2010, 09:56 »

Torres definitely looked out of form unfortunately. The big names are yet to shine at this WC really.

(Not taking anything away from Switzerland, that was a fantastic performance, be interesting to see if they can keep it up compared to 2006 when they qualified comfortably from the group then just kinda faded away.)

the_pied_piper · « **Reply #140 on:** 16 Jun 2010, 10:51 »

Well, I'm sure the Spanish are going to be crucified for that result but I didn't think they played badly, just that Switzerland were great at shutting them down.

That said, Jesus Navas was much better than Silva, who was probably the poorest player on the Spanish team and there was no need to play Busquets and Xabi Alonso. There was also the option of playing the other Fernando Torres (Torres Llorente of Athletic Bilbao) if Torres wasn't able to play from the start and they probably should have too because they had zero aerial threat before he was brought on.

Sometimes you just need to get the job done though, no matter how you play and Switzerland did that today. North Korea made a good attempt of it against Brazil too and with the low goal average so far it may well become the optimal tactical style for this World Cup.

amok · « **Reply #141 on:** 16 Jun 2010, 11:42 »

BBC commentator: "if they lose this game they're on the plane home"

South Africa probably won't need a plane tbh it's not far.

e: well they can book that non-plane now. They need a win vs. France who always start slow and will improve. RSA and Mexico are fucked.

Shame that it's the home nation but that's what happens when you book a WC in a country with a crappy ranking and about 3 decent-ish players.

Darke · « **Reply #142 on:** 16 Jun 2010, 16:47 »

I'm not sure about France. They're not the team they once were, and haven't looked at all impressive in qualification. They should still beat South Africa, but I can see Mexico really causing them some problems.

a pack of wolves · « **Reply #143 on:** 17 Jun 2010, 07:46 »

Nigeria were walking all over Greece, but Kaita just got sent off for inexplicably deciding to aim a kick at a Greek player after the ball had gone out of play. He didn't hurt him, don't think he even touched him, but a straight red because you really can't pull that kind of shit. That got Greece back into it and they've now equalised, I think with their first ever world cup goal.

amok · « **Reply #144 on:** 17 Jun 2010, 08:35 »

Yeah it is their first. That Nigerian guy will be kicking himself, they would have won with 11 men and stood a fair chance of qualifying in 2nd.

october1983 · « **Reply #145 on:** 17 Jun 2010, 08:40 »

While the red was inevitable, I feel like the Greek player also deserved booking for the shameful dramatics as he fell over from a kick that barely made contact with him, if at all. But I guess the ref couldn't tell how bad it was, from where he was standing.

Inlander · « **Reply #146 on:** 17 Jun 2010, 08:41 »

This Nigeria - Greece game is just odd and kind of thrilling. We've seen horrible errors from both goalkeepers which have directly led to goals, but we've also seen both goalies pulling off some amazing saves; we've seen some lovely passing play from both teams and some useless hit-and-hope crosses and long-range shots; and we've seen sheer lunacy. It hasn't been the highest quality game of the tournament (I think that still goes to South Africa vs. Mexico) but I don't think I've enjoyed a game more so far: it's like one of those books or films where shit just keeps happening, and none of it really makes sense, but you just go along for the ride because you can't help admiring the straight-out audacity and ridiculousness of the thing.

Patrick · « **Reply #147 on:** 17 Jun 2010, 09:08 »

Nigeria didn't look so hot in the final 20 minutes, from my viewpoint. Several shot attempts from over 30 meters, and none of them were even all that close. You'd think they'd know better than to take such an enormous risk with the final 15 minutes. If you have an opening, you push through it as far as possible, THEN shoot, so you're closer to the goal and have a wider margin of error. I saw several opportunities there and they really disappointed me.

Enyeama was a complete badass in the second half, which is all I saw, and I feel privileged to have seen him play. The Greek goaltender wasn't so shabby either, very nice deflection right over the crossbar +/-25 minutes before game end.

amok · « **Reply #148 on:** 17 Jun 2010, 09:28 »

Enyeama was also the only reason the Argentina game finished with a respectable scoreline too. Hell of a keeper.

Sadly the potshots from range are a fairly standard sign of a less-disciplined side losing their cool under extreme pressure, the hero from the first RSA game spanked a long shot or two well over the bar when they could've at least attempted a comeback against Uruguay, too.

Hope one or two of the African teams make it out of the groups at least, although really only Ghana stand any great chance. Might seem like Andy Townsend levels of obvious given that they're the only African team to have won a game in the first round, but looking at the others.. Algeria are a shower, Cote D'Ivoire will really struggle against DPRK and (one would assume) lose to Brazil, and Cameroon are carrying a loss to the most beatable team in their group.

a pack of wolves · « **Reply #149 on:** 17 Jun 2010, 10:03 »

I think Ghana can do it. In a way they've already had their toughest game since I'm anticipating everyone in that group losing to Germany, Australia were looking thoroughly beatable and will be without Cahill when they face them. I think this year might be more about Asia than Africa, on the pitch anyway. South Korea, North Korea and Japan are all in with a healthy shot at the knock out stages. Given the quality of their game I wouldn't be surprised to see North Korea make the quarter finals either.

THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Author Topic: The Quadrennial Global Round-Ball Extravaganza (Read 44946 times)