Because international soccer is not my strong suit, I turned to former MPS soccer expert Eamonn Brennan for some anaylsis on the US’ pool for World Cup 2010 in South Africa. By all accounts, the US had a very favorable draw. Outside of England, the US should be able to handle the other two teams — Algeria and Slovenia. And, at least on paper, should advance to the next round.

Some thoughts about each team from Mr. Brenann:

First, England:

It’s better than playing almost any other great club, but England is good. They belong in the elite. I don’t think they’re a great matchup for the US. They have a recent history of choking in World Cups, but they are really good top to bottom and probably have the best midfield in the world. Their back line is bad for Landon Donovan because John Terry and Rio Ferdinand are both like 6′4″ and strong. They will own him.

Algeria:

Good draw. They have no real high-level club players to speak of. it’s a lot easier to qualify out of Africa; there are good African teams but they are not among their best. It should be an easy win.

Slovenia:

Great draw. We don’t have to even worry about England at this point. Because England should finish with three wins (nine points). We’ll likely lose to England but beat both Algeria and Slovenia (six points).

Slovenia and Algeria should lose to both us and England, and one will beat the other, or draw, or whatever. So three points and zero points, or one point each, if they draw.

In my apparently ongoing responsibilities as MPSB’s resident soccer beat blogger — I would have written beat “reporter,” but come on, me? report? ha! — I’ve noticed a trend: more people are caring about soccer. At the very least, people are more frequently crawling out of their holes to hate on soccer, which is as good an indication as any that the sport is trending upward. (Celizic strikes again, by the way. You know it’s bad when Mike Decourcy, probably the most polite writer of all-time, personally calls you out.)

Anyway, if soccer does become more popular, a lot of that popularity will have to do with ESPN czar John Skipper’s programming decisions. If ESPN gives soccer the same treatment as the NFL — especially during the World Cup in 2010 — you can bet on a sudden, if not prolonged, spike in popularity.

Fortunately for people strangely obsessed with the idea of soccer becoming popular in America, it seems that’s exactly what ESPN is going to do. The network will be doing round the clock World Cup coverage next summer. That includes 32 soft-focus personal interest features on a player from each of the tournament’s 32 teams. It also includes Chris Berman doing SportsCenter live from South Africa. Beyond being, as Spencer Hall points out, prime Chris Berman-lion-attack territory — now THAT would make soccer popular — this presents an essential conundrum: Will ESPN somehow overexpose soccer before most people even know what soccer is? I say yes! And then we’ll be right back where we started, which is actually just fine with me, thanks.

It wasn’t so long ago that the primary reports out of South Africa — the site of the 2010 World Cup — were wildly discouraging. By January, the cost of the event had ballooned to about $1.2 billion, four times the amount initially designated when South Africa won the bid. The primary cause for that skyrocketing cost? What else: corruption. (An official was murdered in his home by two masked men after blowing the whistle on manners of new stadium-related corruption.) Then the global economic crisis hit, throwing attendance into jeopardy. And THEN a South African Minister of Something Or Other started speaking in derogatory tones about “these English.”

Really, how many more reasons do you need to not go to a World Cup?

But! That was then. This is June. Things are looking decidedly up, at least according to the Guardian, which claims the corruption and stalled projects of late last year are an afterthought now. The biggest hurdle: getting South Africans interested in the sport in the first place.

South Africa is like a giant building site with roads and airports being upgraded, new stadiums being built in all the major cities and undersea cables being laid to bring greater broadband connectivity with 97% of the population not having access to the internet. It is costing some £30bn while police forces from around the world are advising on security and 41,000 officers are being recruited.

Jordaan said the pessimism thatgreeted the decision to give South Africa the World Cup had dissipated with everything taking shape and that there was no more talk of Fifa needing a contingency plan. All they need is a decent national team.

“We have a dud for a coach,” said the Cape Times after Sunday’s Confederations Cup 0-0 opener against Iraq. “Some fans arrived at the venue (Coca-Cola Park in Johannesburg) lamenting the time spent in traffic and outside the stadium not knowing which entrance to use, but that was nothing compared with the torture they endured from Bafana.”

Keep reading →

There are all sorts of potential problems for World Cup 2010 in South Africa, not least of which is the rampant corruption causing huge delays in stadium building across the country.

But that’s just one issue. The South Africans are also concerned about the always-intertwined prostitution and human trafficking. I wish I could say the supply of such services would dwarf demand during the World Cup, but, well, stealing a human and forcing him or her (usually her) to pleasure tourists for money isn’t the sort of venture one usually undertakes unless he’s guaranteed a healthy profit.

That’s not all, though. There’s the little matter of “these English,” too (HT: Spencer):

Komphela said that measures had to be in place for when “these English people come” to a city. He said they were known for partying in the streets and shops would be plundered while the police stood like a guard of honour. He said there were also times when South Africans behaved badly in the streets.

Ah, well, if he’s willing to admit that South Africans also occasionally loot and plunder, that makes it better. Though it’s not as if “those English” don’t deserve the reputation. Hooliganism is as English as repression, or so I’m told by that dude who wrote “Slumdog Millionaire.”