Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
Germany added to Bush's 'Axis of Evil'

By theboz in Culture
Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 03:05:19 PM EST
Tags: Humour (all tags)
Humour

After a 1:0 defeat of the United States by Germany in the World Cup Tournament this morning, Attorney General John Ashcroft made a televised statement declaring Germany to be the newest member of the United States' 'Axis of Evil.'


Ashcroft said, "The President already made it very clear to the world that who is not with us is against us. The Germans have stood against us today, and we will stand against them tomorrow."

Although less than ten Americans watched the World Cup match between the U.S. and Germany, Ashcroft went on to say, "It is an outrage that our one-time ally has fought us in such a fashion, forcing our men to retreat from the battle. We must not, we can not, allow this to happen."

The President is expected to make a statement today as well. An anonymous white house cabinet member who is a black war hero with the initials C.P. has given Kuro5hin vague information that Bush plans to use so-called "smart bombs" and "daisy cutters" to destroy Frankfurt at 5:00pm EST tomorrow, as well as Berlin on Monday at 6:00pm in order to allow people time to get home and watch it on television.

The President has previously stated, "We will be deliberate, we will be thoughtful, we will consult with our friends and allies, but when I said 'axis of evil,' I meant it." Prime Minister Tony Blair has voiced support of the operation, calling for the bombing of Sao Paolo as part of the 'Axis of Evil' as well.

Some of the terrorists involved with the defeat of the United States have already been captured. Sources say that the list of detainees include Michael Ballack (aka Mohammad Ahkoosh), Oliver Kahn (aka Amir Salaah), and Torsten Frings (aka Ibrahim Zhehan.) These terrorists will be taken to Camp X-ray at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba for torture and secret execution.

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Related Links
o Kuro5hin
o Also by theboz


Display: Sort:
Germany added to Bush's 'Axis of Evil' | 143 comments (125 topical, 18 editorial, 0 hidden)
Don't forget (3.76 / 13) (#1)
by pb on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 10:11:05 AM EST

The planned internment camps of Germans and the revocation of citizenship from German citizens, as they are allied with a KNOWN TERRORIST.

King Dubya The First will soon have these powers; long live King Dubya!
---
"See what the drooling, ravening, flesh-eating hordes^W^W^W^WKuro5hin.org readers have to say."
-- pwhysall

Ummm (2.20 / 5) (#5)
by wiredog on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 10:19:43 AM EST

If they're German citizens, then their US citizenship can't be revoked, since they aren't US citizens to begin with.

Can't sleep. The clowns will get me.
[ Parent ]
Erm, what about ... (3.60 / 5) (#10)
by Ranieri on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 10:24:32 AM EST

dual citizenship?
--
Taste cold steel, feeble cannon restraint rope!
[ Parent ]
No (4.00 / 6) (#13)
by wiredog on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 10:34:56 AM EST

The US doesn't recognize dual citizenship. While it's not explicitly barred, it is implicitly.

Legally, it's not been tested. (At least not recently.) But swearing allegiance to another country is one of the ways to renounce US citizenship. And when you become a US citizen you explicitly renounce all other alliegances (such as citizenship).

This will end up in the courts soon. There's one Al Quaeda guy, can't remember his name, who was born in the US (and is/was thus a US citizen) but who moved to Saudi Arabia (with his family, when he was 3). Did he, by joining Al Quaeda, renounce his US citizenship? What about John Lindh?

Another interesting question is Mexico, which does allow dual citizenship. Someone who emigrates from Mexico to the US and becomes a US citizen is still allowed to vote in Mexican elections. (Vicente Fox campaigned in LA.) But participating in another country's government is also a way to renounce citizenship. So does that person, by participating in the Mexican government (by voting) thus renounce his US citizenship?

Can't sleep. The clowns will get me.
[ Parent ]

Right. (5.00 / 5) (#16)
by Ranieri on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 10:43:54 AM EST

Apparently there's an extra loophole, in the case of children born of American parents in foreign countries. There's quite a number of people in this situation around here, that's why i knew about that. From the state dept website:

Also, a person who is automatically granted another citizenship does not risk losing U.S. citizenship. However, a person who acquires a foreign citizenship by applying for it may lose U.S. citizenship. In order to lose U.S. citizenship, the law requires that the person must apply for the foreign citizenship voluntarily, by free choice, and with the intention to give up U.S. citizenship.

In a nutshell, if they give it to you without asking, it's OK. If you ask for it you forfeit US nationality.

I think the line of reasoning over here (in Holland that is) is that, if you were born here, there's nothing they can do to make you give up your nationality.
--
Taste cold steel, feeble cannon restraint rope!
[ Parent ]

I should have known. (3.81 / 11) (#18)
by Stealth Tuna on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 10:48:42 AM EST

The US doesn't recognize dual citizenship.

Another fine example of American "If you are not with us you're against us" mentality.

[ Parent ]

In the context of this story... (none / 0) (#133)
by haflinger on Mon Jun 24, 2002 at 04:05:43 PM EST

It might be good to note that the Germans don't either.

Did people from the future send George Carlin back in time to save rusty and K5? - leviramsey
[ Parent ]
Exceptions (3.80 / 5) (#21)
by Rande on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 10:55:46 AM EST

A few prominent actors have been allowed to keep their foreign citizenship when gaining American.
And born Americans are allowed to take foreign citizenship if the other country allows it. (many countries don't require you to make an oath of allegiance, so you aren't breaking any oath.)

You are allowed to renounce your American citizenship - except for tax purposes. ie. if the IRS thinks they will lose considerable revenue by allowing you to revoke your citizenship, then they won't let you.
I'm not sure, but I don't believe they can allow you to revoke citizenship but still retain the right to tax you (under the 'no taxation without representation' thingy).
Though of course the federal govt still taxes convicted criminals even though they are not allowed to vote - though that comes under the recent 'we are allowed to do what every we like to people we think are bad' rule.

[ Parent ]

Who's bad? (4.80 / 5) (#23)
by rdskutter on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 11:02:06 AM EST

though that comes under the recent 'we are allowed to do what every we like to people we think are bad' rule.

I think that sums up the current state of affairs in America at the moment. I can't believe you USians are taking this so calmly.


If you're a jock, inflict some pain / If you're a nerd then use your brain - DAPHNE AND CELESTE
[ Parent ]

Oooo, that's clever. (5.00 / 5) (#53)
by wiml on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 03:15:22 PM EST

Did you do something the US didn't like? Well, then, by doing so you must have implicitly given up US citizenship. And guess what? Not being a US citizen, you no longer have a right to a fair trial. (You say you didn't actually do what we say you did? You want a chance to defend yourself in court? Sorry, too late, you're already a noncitizen. Have fun in the detainment camp...)

[ Parent ]
Re: Dual Citizenship (5.00 / 5) (#55)
by wierdo on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 03:24:55 PM EST

The US doesn't recognize dual citizenship. While it's not explicitly barred, it is implicitly.

This is incorrect. Courts have held that unless you specifically intend to give up your US Citizenship, the Government many not strip it from you. I believe the case involved a person who moved to Canada, from the US, then applied for and received Canadian Citizenship. The INS attempted to argue that he was no longer a US Citizen as a result of his gaining Canadian Citizenship, however, the court ruled that since he had not had specific intent to give up his US Citizenship, he had not.

Last I checked, this was being applied in the following way. If you obtain citizenship in a foreign country, you will not lose your US citizenship, even if the other country's citizenship oath includes a statement obligating you to give up other citizenships. However, if you go to a US Consulate and renounce your citizenship in front of them, you can lose it. I seem to remember hearing of a case where a person gained citizenship in a country which required him to renounce his US Citizenship in front of the Consulate, but since this was a requirement of citizenship in the other country, they considered the renunciation as under duress, and therefore not legally valid.

YMMV, especially in light of the WoT.

-Nathan,
Whose girlfriend is a citizen of three different countries



[ Parent ]
i call him... (4.00 / 4) (#30)
by miguel on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 11:56:39 AM EST

"King George"

sounds more tyrrancal that way.

I want you to be free
[ Parent ]

The madness of... (none / 0) (#81)
by cyberformer on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 06:59:00 PM EST

It also reminds us that he owes his position to heredity, not ability.

[ Parent ]
"Son of a Bush" (3.50 / 2) (#85)
by carlos HRE on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 08:03:04 PM EST

...nuff said. 8-)

--
"[Nethack has] the replayability of a Denise Richards look-alike sex drone." -- MotorMachineMercenary

[ Parent ]
Bring it on! (2.42 / 7) (#4)
by hesk on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 10:16:19 AM EST



My response to the news (4.71 / 32) (#8)
by marcos on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 10:20:42 AM EST

I have formed the "Northern Berlin Alliance", and I have declared war on the government. I expect the U.S. to be sending a large amount of money to me in the next few days, and within 6 months, I believe I will be appointed President of the country.

All bow to me!

We wuz robbed! (4.57 / 7) (#12)
by KilljoyAZ on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 10:28:50 AM EST

FIFA and the refs are next.

===
Creativitiy cannot be SPELT by over 98% of all American troops. - psychologist
Refs suck (4.33 / 3) (#31)
by Rasman on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 12:00:48 PM EST

Italy was screwed worse than the US this tournament, but that handball on the goal threshold was pretty clear from the television cameras.

And what was up with that red card in the Brazil-England game?

Turkey and Korea in the final, babeeee!

---
Brave. Daring. Fearless. Clippy - The Clothes Pin Stuntman
[ Parent ]
karma (4.60 / 5) (#35)
by aphrael on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 12:13:29 PM EST

the US had O'Brien's handball against Mexico go unnoticed; this one was only fair.

[ Parent ]
Fair vs. Unfair (none / 0) (#107)
by Rasman on Sat Jun 22, 2002 at 05:21:13 AM EST

So if the referees are unfair to everyone, that makes them fair?

n wrongs make a right?

---
Brave. Daring. Fearless. Clippy - The Clothes Pin Stuntman
[ Parent ]
Quick question (4.33 / 3) (#58)
by CanSpice on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 03:37:46 PM EST

Do you know the rules of soccer? The German defender made no move to play the ball with his hand. After the ball hit him, he didn't move his arm at all. This lead the referee to make the correct call in not ruling it a hand ball.

In this case, the ball played the hand, and the hand did not play the ball. No penalty shot is the correct call in that case.
--- I don't have a sig.
[ Parent ]

Quick Answer (4.50 / 2) (#66)
by pmc on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 04:14:52 PM EST

You do not know the rules of football (or at least not as well as you think you do). The offence is deliberately handling the ball (Rule 12). There is nothing in the rule about moving your arm or hand. This is fairly obvious - imagine if the wall at a free kick all raised their arms before the kick was taken - if the ball hit them then it would be a free kick or a penalty kick (not shot!) even if they did not move their arms subsequently.

But, as you say, I think the referee's decision was correct in this case (as it was Hugh Dallas who was the referee I presume this was a fluke).

[ Parent ]

But ... (4.00 / 1) (#68)
by thebrix on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 04:20:52 PM EST

... if the ball accidentally hit a defender's hand on the goal line (perfectly possible - imagine a strong shot from a few yards away with no chance to react) it would be a brave referee who didn't award a penalty, and I suspect almost all would :)

The late Professor Stephen Jay Gould gave the definitive account of a referee's discretion to interpret the rules depending on the context.

[ Parent ]

Fair enough (none / 0) (#83)
by CanSpice on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 07:38:42 PM EST

I was describing "deliberately handling the ball" as not moving your hand before or after the ball hits it, which is what happened.

We're arguing the same side of the same coin, though.
--- I don't have a sig.
[ Parent ]

What goes around comes around (none / 0) (#73)
by zocky on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 05:59:55 PM EST

While Italy really did get screwed in this championship, they're probably the last who have any right to complain. Usually it's teams playing against them that get screwed by referees.

But that's beside the point. The game has become so fast that there's just no way for referees to really see all that's going on. Another thing is that audiences these days get to see instant replays, which makes refereeing errors really obvious. It's high time FIFA made instant replays available to the judges (at least at the international level of competition - at local levels this is clearly not feasible).

z.

---
I mean, if coal can be converted to energy, then couldn't diamonds?
[ Parent ]

Italy (4.70 / 20) (#14)
by gazbo on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 10:37:12 AM EST

This has practically happened for real in Italy. They've not only accused the cup of being fixed, but also Ahn Jung Hwan has been fired from his Italian club because he scored the golden goal that knocked Italy out of the cup.

Nothing to do with the fact that Italy scored a goal and then spent the remainder of the match on their boring arses, oh no. It was a conspiracy, and somehow the Korean was at fault for scoring.


-----
Topless, revealing, nude pics and vids of Zora Suleman! Upskirt and down blouse! Cleavage!
Hardcore ZORA SULEMAN pics!

And FIFA can't keep it's mouth shut to save itself (4.50 / 4) (#25)
by Ranieri on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 11:10:55 AM EST

Take a look at this: (FIFA President) Blatter: Italy were robbed of golden goal.


--
Taste cold steel, feeble cannon restraint rope!
[ Parent ]

he was offsides anyway (5.00 / 1) (#87)
by alprazolam on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 08:47:47 PM EST

i'm waiting for a new spoof now. imagine donovan in front of the goal, on his knees clutching his face in agony.

"KAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHN"

friggin german goalie and their lucky handballs. blah.

[ Parent ]

Italy (4.80 / 5) (#69)
by Pac on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 04:27:08 PM EST

They had more than their share of unfair referees. But I was glad to see then and their boring style go.  Every Italy game I saw I thought they would ask for chairs so as not to get too tired after scoring once.

Evolution doesn't take prisoners


[ Parent ]
Don't feel sorry for Ahn Jung Hwan. (4.00 / 1) (#130)
by haflinger on Mon Jun 24, 2002 at 03:56:22 PM EST

He's going to go to the Premier League, or the Bundesliga, or Spain. And he's going to make some team very happy to have him. And they're going to actually put him on the pitch, too. He's a lot more effective that way. :)

No, I don't have a crystal ball, or The Inside Track. Just call it a hunch.

Did people from the future send George Carlin back in time to save rusty and K5? - leviramsey
[ Parent ]

No one watching (4.33 / 9) (#27)
by Torgos Pizza on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 11:31:51 AM EST

Although less than ten Americans watched the World Cup match...

This is actually the only truly funny part of the article. Ratings on ESPN, ESPN2 and Univision have been stellar for them. For instance, Univision stated they had (if I recall correctly) 4.3 million people watching the US vs. Mexico game. ESPN had something over 2 million. Considering the hour in which it was played, that's fantastic.

I intend to live forever, or die trying.

Yeah but... (3.75 / 4) (#28)
by MKalus on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 11:33:44 AM EST

... how many of the people watching the US vs. Mexico game where Mexicans?

[ Parent ]
I can't speak for the television audience (4.00 / 1) (#59)
by aphrael on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 03:41:38 PM EST

but at the bar I went to last night to watch Brazil-England, only about 1/3 were foreigners ...

[ Parent ]
Re: Univision / ESPN (5.00 / 2) (#29)
by cicero on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 11:45:40 AM EST

Has anyone else noticed that Univision was about 10 seconds ahead of ESPN? Anyone know why this is?


--
I am sorry Cisco, for Microsoft has found a new RPC flaw - tonight your e0 shall be stretched wide like goatse.
[ Parent ]
Re: Univision / ESPN (5.00 / 4) (#33)
by tftp on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 12:04:45 PM EST

Probably both used those live video time machines, for ad insertion purposes. These can delay the feed up to few minutes, IIRC.

[ Parent ]
That would make sense, but (4.75 / 4) (#51)
by Ian Clelland on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 02:55:39 PM EST

I always thought it was so that they could listen to the BBC commentary live, and then be able to say something intelligent ten seconds later :)

[ Parent ]
No need (5.00 / 1) (#63)
by tftp on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 04:12:30 PM EST

Talk is cheap, but ads are not ;-)

Sports commentators (both on radio and TV) don't need delays. First of all, they are exceptionally good in talking in real time. Secondly, many would need something like 3600 seconds delay to say something intelligent anyway :-) Sports broadcasts are not the right place for intelligent dialogs.

It would also be very difficult for commentators to speak with constant delay. Try it, and you will find it virtually impossible. The brain does not have efficient pipelines, at least of this sort. Commenting in real time is easier.

[ Parent ]

For better production values (5.00 / 1) (#95)
by Kimble on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 11:56:21 PM EST

Everyone in the world uses the same FIFA video feed. This means that ESPN doesn't show what'll be shown next. By delaying the coverage a few seconds, ESPN's producers can do useful stuff like:

1) If the camera lingers on a player for a few seconds, they can add a caption giving name, club, caps, goals, etc.

2) They can tell the commentators what part will be replayed during a stoppage in action. This allows for smoother segues into analysis. A hypothetical example from the US-Mexico game:

Jack: "75th minute... Arellano... Blanco... Hernandez dives, the ref's not buying it... Goal kick, US. But let's not forget that non-call on that handball in the penalty area by O'Brien..."

[World Cup logo wipe to replay of said event]

Ty: "Blah blah blah, blah, blah blah."
--
Now. Where was I?

[ Parent ]

speaking of caps. (none / 0) (#101)
by cicero on Sat Jun 22, 2002 at 02:53:40 AM EST

what are they?
I'm not a futbol guy and I've been trying to figure it out for a while, obviously to no effect.


--
I am sorry Cisco, for Microsoft has found a new RPC flaw - tonight your e0 shall be stretched wide like goatse.
[ Parent ]
oh..the number of times played on the nat. team... (none / 0) (#102)
by cicero on Sat Jun 22, 2002 at 02:57:07 AM EST

/me tells himself to RTFM,MF

thanks for the info on the fifa feed, though.


--
I am sorry Cisco, for Microsoft has found a new RPC flaw - tonight your e0 shall be stretched wide like goatse.
[ Parent ]
Caps (none / 0) (#108)
by Master Of Ninja on Sat Jun 22, 2002 at 05:52:44 AM EST

Just an additional bit of info - the word "caps" indicates how many times a person played for their national team, and derives from the fact that the players are actually given caps (say as in baseball cap) for playing the game. I know this was started off in England, and I think the FA (and the Scottish FA) still hand out proper caps for players. Don't know if other national sides do this now, but this is how players earn caps for their country.

[ Parent ]
stellar only for cable channels at that time slot (4.66 / 3) (#40)
by demi on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 12:37:26 PM EST

otherwise, it was actually a very small Nielsen share (compared to prime time Thursday).

[ Parent ]
Univision's Big Win (4.40 / 5) (#41)
by wiredog on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 12:42:51 PM EST

From the Washington Post
More people -- both Spanish- and English-speaking -- are watching World Cup matches on Univision than on ESPN and ESPN2, providing a runaway ratings victory for the Spanish-language network.


Can't sleep. The clowns will get me.
[ Parent ]
a tip of intelligence data (1.00 / 1) (#47)
by sye on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 02:07:23 PM EST

for you only. Shhhh...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
commentary - For a better sye@K5
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ripple me ~~> ~allthingsgo: gateway to Garden of Perfect Brightess in CNY/BTC/LTC/DRK
rubbing u ~~> ~procrasti: getaway to HE'LL
Hey! at least he was in a stable relationship. - procrasti
enter K5 via Blastar.in
[ Parent ]

One reason (4.50 / 2) (#60)
by Torgos Pizza on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 03:54:25 PM EST

In Dallas where I live, we have the lowest cable subscriber to population ratio in the US. The local sports radio station wondered if only Hispanic viewers were watching. Many people who don't have cable or a dish watch Univision because soccer really doesn't need all that commentary. Then again, they have the announcer on Univision that screams "Goooooooooal" for 30 seconds.

I intend to live forever, or die trying.
[ Parent ]
No one watching... (4.50 / 2) (#99)
by whatwasthatagain on Sat Jun 22, 2002 at 01:58:21 AM EST

Although less than ten Americans watched the World Cup match...

This is actually the only truly funny part of the article. Ratings on ESPN, ESPN2 and Univision have been stellar for them. For instance, Univision stated they had (if I recall correctly) 4.3 million people watching the US vs. Mexico game. ESPN had something over 2 million. Considering the hour in which it was played, that's fantastic.

Compare that with the number of Mexicans watching the same game. Considering that is was a similar ungodly hour in Mexico, the numbers rooting for the USA is hardly fantastic.

There is a long way to go before football (I desist from calling it "soccer") becomes mainstream in the US.
--

With profound apologies to whomsoever this sig originally belonged.
[ Parent ]

Very nice (4.37 / 8) (#32)
by DanTheCat on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 12:02:25 PM EST

It would be even funnier if I didn't have such a hard time suspending my disbelief to imagine Bush reacting this way towards a football game. (football? why in tarnation were we playing football in korea against germany!?! And why wasn't emmet smith there? Oh, you mean soccer...)

Great game, though. It was a good fight, but Germany's defense was just a little to strong. (or our offense was just not quite up to the task...)

Did you see that beautiful goal on the free kick by brazil!?! Damn good shooting.

Proud to be one of the Ten...

Dan :)

<--->
I was in need of help
Heading to black out
'Til someone told me 'run on in honey
Before someone blows your god damn brains out'<

Your forward players... (4.00 / 1) (#72)
by Pac on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 05:34:56 PM EST

I saw just the first half, I had to sleep a bit after watching Brazil's game (which started at 3:30 am, Brazil time).

USA could have decided (or at least score two or three times) the game in the first 30 minutes. Khan is great, but your players could be a little bit more careful.

Anyway, for the first time in my life I saw a good USA football team (1994 team was surprising, but far from good). Maybe in 2006 you can go even further.

Evolution doesn't take prisoners


[ Parent ]
About that Brazil win (5.00 / 1) (#105)
by dirtydingus on Sat Jun 22, 2002 at 05:03:07 AM EST

Brazillian football star Ronaldinho has today been flooded with calls from producers in the adult film industry, after they heard reports that he could lob Seaman from 30 yards

DD


People can be put into 10 groups: Those that understand binary and those that don't.
[ Parent ]

Incorrect (4.00 / 1) (#106)
by gazbo on Sat Jun 22, 2002 at 05:10:38 AM EST

That was not a beautiful free kick on goal.

That was a fluke.

Bitter? Me?


-----
Topless, revealing, nude pics and vids of Zora Suleman! Upskirt and down blouse! Cleavage!
Hardcore ZORA SULEMAN pics!

[ Parent ]

Believe it or not...it was not a fluke (4.00 / 1) (#113)
by cribeiro on Sat Jun 22, 2002 at 02:26:39 PM EST

There is good evidence that it was not a fluke. Hearing to the audio frm the field showed that at least of the brazilian players shouted 'Didn't I told you' right after the goal. After the game, it was explained that one of the brazilian players had recently played a match against Seaman's team (I believe it is Arsenal, but I'm not sure). He said that Seaman took a goal from that distance, because he had this habit of moving forward a little too soon to intercept the ball, so they actually planned to try that kick.

Anyway, it was a strange play. But it was beautiful, and decided the game.

[ Parent ]

I have to disagree, and agree. (none / 0) (#132)
by haflinger on Mon Jun 24, 2002 at 04:03:32 PM EST

It wasn't beautiful.

It wasn't a fluke.

Seaman screwed up. He was cheating out of his line, expecting Ronaldinho to kick an amazing cross to Rivaldo (probably; Ronaldo wasn't having an especially good game) and was getting ready to defend Rivaldo.

Ronaldinho saw this, and decided to slam it in. That was a pretty easy shot - for him.

That's why I say Seaman screwed up. You just don't disrespect a striker like Ronaldinho. Sure, he's not as good as Rivaldo, or Ronaldo, or Pele, but neither is Beckham, and I wouldn't cheat out of my line against Beckham either. :)

Did people from the future send George Carlin back in time to save rusty and K5? - leviramsey
[ Parent ]

That Free Kick.... (2.00 / 1) (#118)
by PrettyBoyTim on Sun Jun 23, 2002 at 05:45:51 AM EST

Oh, how I wept...

[ Parent ]
Timeism! (4.46 / 13) (#34)
by ocelot on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 12:13:17 PM EST

Bush plans to use so-called "smart bombs" and "daisy cutters" to destroy Frankfurt at 5:00pm EST tomorrow, as well as Berlin on Monday at 6:00pm in order to allow people time to get home and watch it on television.

Yet another example of blatant discrimination against the West Coast. 9:00pm EST is a much more appropriate time, as most USians will be home, while few will be asleep.

The purpose of adding times and locations (3.75 / 4) (#39)
by theboz on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 12:32:37 PM EST

I'm sure you know how the press always got fussed at for "leaking" information about the U.S.'s activities in Afghanistan. I just thought I'd make fun of that.

Stuff.
[ Parent ]

-1 from me (1.40 / 35) (#37)
by Angelic Upstart on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 12:30:16 PM EST

Good comedy or satire is funny because it is close to the truth and this is nothing close to the truth. Soccer is gay. We don't care. That is all.

Soccer is not gay (4.35 / 14) (#46)
by thenick on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 02:07:01 PM EST

Where did you get the idea that soccer is gay?

Oh, nevermind.

 
"Doing stuff is overrated. Like Hitler, he did a lot, but don't we all wish he would have stayed home and gotten stoned?" -Dex
[ Parent ]

more disturbing photos (4.20 / 5) (#61)
by Sacrifice on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 03:59:04 PM EST

[disclaimer: vaguely sickening soccer action shots]

http://www.madville.com/go.php?op=goo&lidd=10842

[ Parent ]

Not bad... (none / 0) (#112)
by garibaldi on Sat Jun 22, 2002 at 10:18:56 AM EST

some quite funny but a couple aren't even football (association) but aussie rules and rugby... Amusing footie site at http://www.uglyfootballers.com/

[ Parent ]
ahahahah (none / 0) (#143)
by micmatic on Fri Jun 28, 2002 at 12:46:18 PM EST

the last one cracks me up


[ Parent ]
whoooho! that picture of donovan!! (2.00 / 2) (#67)
by buglord on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 04:18:28 PM EST

No wonder guys like that lost against Germany!

I think the only country where people think that football's gay is America. But tell me, what's so masculine about say, speed skating?

I'm happy so much now I know how to use a gun!
Die Technik bereit und stabil... wir wollen zurck ins Telespiel!
welle:erdball - telespiel
[ Parent ]

Not at all. (none / 0) (#92)
by vastor on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 10:02:27 PM EST

I used to know a guy in high school that'd call soccer gay. Though that was more as a rivalry thing, since he thought rugby was the real mans sport (this is in Australia). It's just one way people try and put things down, is to label it gay, and has probably happened in every nation at various times.


[ Parent ]
Those pix are not gay (none / 0) (#76)
by zocky on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 06:12:15 PM EST

They're faggotty, as opposed to gay.

---
I mean, if coal can be converted to energy, then couldn't diamonds?
[ Parent ]

bahahaha (none / 0) (#116)
by Arkayne on Sun Jun 23, 2002 at 05:24:54 AM EST

...dying.. from laughter.. please.. call ambulance..

[ Parent ]
Gay Sports Fan Central (none / 0) (#119)
by driptray on Sun Jun 23, 2002 at 07:24:17 AM EST

Actually, I think this is the site you were looking for.


--
We brought the disasters. The alcohol. We committed the murders. - Paul Keating
[ Parent ]
Touche! (2.57 / 7) (#52)
by PhillipW on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 03:07:10 PM EST

-1 to you for not only naming yourself after a band, but also naming yourself after a shitty band.

-Phil
[ Parent ]
you think american football isn't ? (none / 0) (#114)
by christoph s on Sat Jun 22, 2002 at 04:59:56 PM EST

watch and learn... anal invaders

[ Parent ]
addendum (none / 0) (#115)
by christoph s on Sat Jun 22, 2002 at 05:10:38 PM EST

okay, it was rugby, but what the heck. part 2

[ Parent ]
shhhh (3.83 / 12) (#38)
by VoxLobster on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 12:32:27 PM EST

These terrorists will be taken to Camp X-ray at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba for torture and secret execution.

It's not a secret when you tell everyone about it... +1

VoxLobster
I was raised by a cup of coffee! -- Homsar

ludicrous (3.06 / 15) (#42)
by demi on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 12:52:13 PM EST

Nobody in the US cares about soccer enough to even understand the joke. On the other hand, I can easily imagine such measures being taken by soccer lunatics in other parts of the world. I stayed up late to watch a few of the games, but even if we had won in the WC finals I don't think I would have taken to the streets with a bottle of Champagne.

At best I think the WC would be as popular in the US as the Olympics. What turns me off is the quality of the officiating (they need at least 4 refs to keep it fair), the constant flopping and faking of injuries by players, the infrequent and random nature of scoring, penalty kicks that often decide the outcome of a match, and worst of all: the bloated, totally overblown hype that accompanies each and every aspect of planning and playing the World Cup (Olympic coverage is comically similar). Why should I wait 4 years when I can get the same thing every January with the Super Bowl?

soccer blather (4.37 / 8) (#49)
by aphrael on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 02:41:42 PM EST

Nobody in the US cares about soccer enough to even understand the joke.

That may depend on where in the country you are; the bar I was at last night was full, and everyone at work is talking about the cup.

but even if we had won in the WC finals I don't think I would have taken to the streets with a bottle of Champagne.

Ahhh, but fans in the rest of the world do, and it's fun; I was in Avignon four years ago when France beat Croatia, and the entire town came out to celebrate. (And US fans do this sort of thing for the Super Bowl, so there's some parallel at least).

the constant flopping and faking of injuries by players

That's obnoxious, and I really think they should start issuing red cards for faking injuries. They fined Rivaldo, but that's not enough of a sanction for me.

the infrequent and random nature of scoring

Infrequent scoring is good. The US-Germany game last night was considerably better than the Brazil-Costa Rica game because the teams were playing much more defensively; it was exciting when a team came *close* to getting a goal. Low scores usually indicate good play.

As for random --- most goals aren't. They may *seem* that way, because you don't get a good view of the entire team when you're focusing on the guy with the ball, but they're usually very carefully set up and planned in advance. Some exceptions apply, of course, but in general this is true.

penalty kicks that often decide the outcome of a match

Why is that bad? If the two teams have fought each other to a draw, how should the game be decided? (Note that in regular games, draws are acceptable; it's only in single-elimination tournaments that penalty kicks are used). Sudden-death overtime is IMO much worse; it changes the game from an ebb-and-flow strategic battle to a who-scores-first tactical struggle.

totally overblown hype

In what way is it worse than the hype about the NBA playoffs, or the World Series, or the Super Bowl? Hell, living in the US, i'm far more subject to hype about those than I am about the world cup --- and in much of the rest of the world, the hype is justified; when I was in Europe during the world cup 4 years ago, every country I was in basically shut down during the games.

Why should I wait 4 years when I can get the same thing every January with the Super Bowl?

That depends on what you're looking for. :) American football is much more regimented than soccer is, and much slower (for my taste, much less interesting, although American football is the only one of the standard American sports I can muster any interest in at all). Also, I get a great deal of enjoyment out of watching the intensely nationalistic crowds cheer on their teams; this is something that you can't get every four years in the Super Bowl, and it's even something missing from MLS, which is less fun as a result.

[ Parent ]

Talk about hype... (4.75 / 4) (#77)
by LodeRunner on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 06:12:59 PM EST

totally overblown hype

In what way is it worse than the hype about the NBA playoffs, or the World Series, or the Super Bowl?

Talk about hype. They call their baseball championship "World Series".


---
"dude, you can't even spell your own name" -- Lode Runner
[ Parent ]

Answers to your questions (4.90 / 10) (#50)
by miguel on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 02:46:16 PM EST

Penalty Kicks don't come into the game as often as you claim.

Why every 4 years? Well let me ask you something, do you think they just draw the 32 countries that are playing out of a hat?

Like the olympics, these teams had to go through qualifying rounds in order to get to the finals. There are currently 203 countries that compete for the chance to get to the world cup. You can imagine that it takes awhile to hold the qualifying rounds to shrink that number to 32. This also isn't the only competition soccer players play in. All the continental soccer federations hold their own regional competitions about every two years during the off-years off world cup play. Not to mention club team leagues and international club tournaments. Even holding the world cup only every 2 years would burn players out (in fact, burning out players is indeed a current problem, as france's exemplified poor showing)

I must disagree with the "random nature of scoring" (i agree scores are low, but i don't really think that's a big deal). To a person unfamiliar or unwilling to understand american football, it too can seem rather "random" scoring.

I want you to be free
[ Parent ]

Soccer is a big issue to some people (4.00 / 2) (#70)
by panum on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 04:34:13 PM EST

In 1969 El Salvador and Uruguay fought a brief war. The reason? A soccer game is blaimed, but that is not the whole truth. For example, this page clamis there already was serious unrest before the game. Nevertheless, the history of soccer seems to have darker aspects.

For more a brutal stuff, look up how the S game has been evoluted into the modern form. In the old days, players were even killed in the "game".

-P

[ Parent ]
Not Uruguay (none / 0) (#74)
by zocky on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 06:06:21 PM EST

IIRC it was El Salvador and Honduras.

---
I mean, if coal can be converted to energy, then couldn't diamonds?
[ Parent ]

Super Bowl (5.00 / 1) (#117)
by PrettyBoyTim on Sun Jun 23, 2002 at 05:43:05 AM EST

I don't really see how you can compare the Superbowl to the World Cup - the Superbowl is, after all, just the final of a regional tournament, much like the FA cup in the UK.

There isn't (as far as I know) any international American Football competition.

In the UK we have the FA cup every year and every two years we have either the World Cup or the European Cup.

[ Parent ]

Great game for Germany? I doubt... (4.76 / 13) (#48)
by llogiq on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 02:34:00 PM EST

C'mon. Your allies did practically everything to let you win the game, with the possible exception of Mr. Ballack (who accidentially hit the ball with his head and thereby scored a goal) and Mr. Kahn (who didn't seem to understand what an alliance means).

Though we won, you can't blame us for it...blame the referee, that's what we do when our folks lose a game ;)

+1FP

And some would say the US could... (5.00 / 1) (#93)
by gazuga on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 10:18:02 PM EST

blame the referee.  I myself am still undecided about that handball.  On the one hand (no pun intended) the defender did not play the ball with his hand -- it didn't seem to me that his hand moved at all.  OTOH, even though he did not actively play the ball with his hand, he denied an obvious goal scoring opportunity by handling the ball, albeit in an indirect manner (which would have been a red card/PK had the refs decided it was a handball).


This morning I thought more like the former, but the more I think about it, the more I'm leaning toward the latter.  I must admit I'm a bit biased on the issue (much as you are in Germany's favor ;))


Handball or no handball, I thought the US played brilliantly compared to any other US play that I have ever seen.  I'm glad to see the team improving so much.  Now if only (real) football were loved here as much as it is in the rest of the world...

[ Parent ]
Maybe someone can clear this up for me.... (4.16 / 12) (#54)
by Mr E Beast on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 03:21:46 PM EST

I tried to watch the US vs Germany game this morning, but what I don't understand is this:

Where are the bats? And which guy was the pitcher?

But you must admit (4.00 / 4) (#56)
by Pac on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 03:26:05 PM EST

They didn't had any weapon of mass destruction. They mostly had Mr. Khan, which is more like a SDI. One that works, that is.

Evolution doesn't take prisoners


10 Americans? (3.77 / 9) (#57)
by jayhawk88 on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 03:33:43 PM EST

God help us if it really was that many.

Why, then, should we grant government the Orwellian capability to listen at will and in real time to our communications across the Web? -- John Ashcroft
I know you're joking, but (4.66 / 3) (#62)
by nosilA on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 04:04:22 PM EST

There were more than 10 people at my office at 9 AM sitting/standing in the main break room watching the end of the game.  It's actually getting to be quite popular here.  At RFK stadium (where the DC United Major League Soccer team plays, used to be where the Redskins (NFL) played) they had the game showing on the big screen, concession stands open, and a pretty massive crowd.  

-Alison
Vote to Abstain!
[ Parent ]

How Original... (4.75 / 4) (#64)
by MantorpCity on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 04:12:34 PM EST

No other media makes fun of how boring soccer is and how Americans don't care.

US played very well, could've won with a little luck.

It's easy to be the best in sports almost no other countries bother to play, for the US to reach the quarterfinals in a sport played in virtually every country in the world is a major accomplishment. Go watch the MLS.

watch the MLS? (2.00 / 1) (#65)
by squainthanutz on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 04:14:12 PM EST

that's like watching flies fuck!

[ Parent ]
Agree (5.00 / 2) (#71)
by henrik on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 04:55:57 PM EST

> US played very well, could've won with a little luck.

Agreed, but the Germans weren't very good today. The US had a lot of great chances, but like you say, the margins weren't with them today. The US probably deserved a penalty shot for Torsten Frings "save", but well..

I think the US got a lot of respect on the football courts today, Germany made it with a fair bit of luck and a lot of routine.

I think it's fun to see outsiders like USA, Senegal and Korea giving the established football nations of Europe and South America a run for their money.

Akademiska Intresseklubben antecknar!
[ Parent ]

Not just today (none / 0) (#75)
by zocky on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 06:10:34 PM EST

Germans haven't played real good football for years. Last thing they won was European championships 6 years ago (even then the Czechs should have won the finals).

USA coming so far is really a big accomplishment. They made me support the German team for the first time in my life :)

z.

---
I mean, if coal can be converted to energy, then couldn't diamonds?
[ Parent ]

Zebras (5.00 / 1) (#80)
by LodeRunner on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 06:26:05 PM EST

I think it's fun to see outsiders like USA, Senegal and Korea giving the established football nations of Europe and South America a run for their money.

Zebras, that's the slang for those "unlikely winners" here in Brazil (interesting, never asked myself why).

Sure it is. Only three already-world-champions countries left yesterday, only two today.

But the second best fun (after watching the games of your own country) is to watch your traditional World Cup enemies being defeated. There was great rejoice here in Brazil when Argentina and France didn't classify, and Korea beat Italy :)


---
"dude, you can't even spell your own name" -- Lode Runner
[ Parent ]

Germans... not very good? (none / 0) (#129)
by haflinger on Mon Jun 24, 2002 at 03:53:03 PM EST

Come on, what about Oliver Kahn and his three amazing saves? If Kahn had been a Normal Human Being (or even just a pretty good international level keeper), the US would have been up at least 2-1 at the half.

I admit to being a fan of keepers. However, this old David Seaman loyalist has been converted (well especially after the rotten performance Seaman turned in against Brazil; Ronaldinho should never have been able to score when he did - you just don't give a team like Brazil chances like that) to Kahn's intense technique.

Sure, the Germans aren't the best offensive team, unless Klose is hot, and he wasn't against the US. But their defense is very good, probably the best left in the Cup, and the keeper is clearly the best of the Cup.

Did people from the future send George Carlin back in time to save rusty and K5? - leviramsey
[ Parent ]

Don't waste time on the Germans... (5.00 / 5) (#78)
by LodeRunner on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 06:15:20 PM EST

...we are on our way to crush them.

Penta Brasil!!!


---
"dude, you can't even spell your own name" -- Lode Runner

GooooooooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooaaaaallll (4.00 / 3) (#86)
by X-Nc on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 08:39:01 PM EST

Not this year. Rudi, Rudi, Rudi!!!

FWIW, this is the best game I've seen the USA team play. They really kept the heat on and had some very good chances. If this had been the German teams of the last few Cups they would likely have won. Rudi has made an effort to get Germany out of the (IMNSHO, very stupid) tactic of playing so conservitivly that they end up all standing around their own goal. The US team and the country should be very proud of the effort they put in. They played with the Big Boys and held their own.

Here's to a German/Brasilian1 final.

1) My fiance is cheering for Brasil. When she told me I almost had to call off the engagement. :-)

--
Aaahhhh!!!! My K5 subscription expired. Now I can't spell anymore.
[ Parent ]

Your fiance (none / 0) (#134)
by ventonegro on Tue Jun 25, 2002 at 01:02:24 PM EST

Maybe calling off the engagement would do her a lot of good, so she could engage a proper Brazilian football fan :-P
--
VentoNegro
"Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, so why should we let them have ideas?" -- Josef Stalin
[ Parent ]
Competition (none / 0) (#139)
by X-Nc on Wed Jun 26, 2002 at 09:30:38 AM EST

Heh! You want me to ask? She's Thai so you'd have to be able to handle a seriously LD relationship. Feel free to check my Diary for details. ;-)

--
Aaahhhh!!!! My K5 subscription expired. Now I can't spell anymore.
[ Parent ]
The simple truth (2.33 / 3) (#79)
by bouncing on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 06:22:24 PM EST

I like how everyone makes fun of Americans for not liking soccer. Like it's some kind of social commentary that the more violent game of football (American football) is more popular. But, in truth, America is doing something very American: It's rejecting a corporate push.

The only reason soccer is being pushed is for giant corporations to make more money. It's the inverse of EuroDisney. :) I say: I don't care about soccer and that's culture -- not the lack there of.

Um, have you ever watched American football? (5.00 / 5) (#82)
by localroger on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 07:26:55 PM EST

Saying American football is not corporate-driven is like saying rain is not wet. If the legal talent directed at licensing fees alone were directed toward something useful, we would have starships and space drives by now.

I can haz blog!
[ Parent ]

the most boring game to watch (nt) (1.00 / 2) (#94)
by mami on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 11:07:10 PM EST



[ Parent ]
Not the point (none / 0) (#141)
by bouncing on Wed Jun 26, 2002 at 03:50:32 PM EST

Of course American football is corporate. Everything is here. The point is, the world shouldn't take such a great shock just because Americans choose to ignore the massive soccer marketing effort.

[ Parent ]
American football more popular because ads. (4.50 / 2) (#84)
by aralin on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 07:40:35 PM EST

Did it occur to you that the reason why baseball and american football win in corporate america by such a margin is the interuptible nature of the game and possibility to add dazillion of ads?

Soccer on the other hand runs 2 times for 45 uninterupted minutes and the 10 mins in between are well used for a piss break. No way you can make even 1/10th of money in ads as on american football, which is exactly 10 sec. of action, 2 mins of commercials.

[ Parent ]

The Australian solution (4.00 / 1) (#91)
by Sven on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 09:50:46 PM EST

Channel 7 in Australia have found a solution to this problem for when they show a game on TV - just randomly insert ads for a minute or two in the middle of the game. After all, if anything happens during those two minutes they can always show it on replay. Perhaps American networks can learn from this example to help make real football more popular in the US.

Thankfully Channel 7 didn't get their hands on the World Cup.

S

--
harshbutfair - you know it makes sense
[ Parent ]

What a disgrace (none / 0) (#135)
by ventonegro on Tue Jun 25, 2002 at 01:11:23 PM EST

If those ads were to appear during any game here in Brazil we'd simply walk on the streets destroying anything on sight until they showed the entire game properly. Even the thought of interrupted games makes me sick.
--
VentoNegro
"Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, so why should we let them have ideas?" -- Josef Stalin
[ Parent ]
Popularity of Soccer (5.00 / 1) (#97)
by bjwest on Sat Jun 22, 2002 at 12:29:40 AM EST

Believe it or not, soccer is becoming more and more popular each year. When I was growing up (back in the 70's), soccer was virtually unheard of amongst the youth in the United States.

I coach soccer and baseball for military dependents (9 - 14 agegroup). I find where I'm at (currently Guam) there is more interest in soccer than baseball amongst the kids. Last season, we had six soccer teams and only three baseball. This season, we're down to two baseball only because we moved five players up from the 9 - 10 to 11 - 12 league. We wouldn't have had a 11 - 12 league otherwise. Soccer signeups haven't started yet, but I'm sure there will be as much, if not more interest as last season.

Soccer is more demanding mentally, as well as physically, however it's easier to teach the kids. Part of it is that they seem to enjoy it more. They're finding out that it's more fun to be active the entire game than to just stand around hoping the ball will come your way.

My only hope is that soccer doesn't become as commercialized as the other sports, but I know it will. The corporations of this county can't stand it when people enjoy something and they don't make money off it.

[ Parent ]
I have another truth (4.40 / 5) (#103)
by miasma on Sat Jun 22, 2002 at 03:40:19 AM EST

>But, in truth, America is doing something very >American: It's rejecting a corporate push. No, the very american thing is: If they are not good in it, it's un-American. Like smartness or peace;)

--
"No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God." - G.Bush sen.
[ Parent ]
Smartness (none / 0) (#140)
by bouncing on Wed Jun 26, 2002 at 03:48:59 PM EST

I think George W. Bush said he's looking for cabinet members with "Smartness"

Had to point out the irony of that.

[ Parent ]

"fewer", not "less"! (5.00 / 1) (#88)
by danny on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 08:53:33 PM EST

Too late to change it now, but it's annoying as I'm forwarding this to friends by email. (I'm glad K5 doesn't run too much humour, but it was great finding this on the front page when I woke up!)

Danny.
[900 book reviews and other stuff]

Oh, god. (3.75 / 4) (#89)
by kevsan on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 09:12:43 PM EST

The simultaneously worst and best part about this article is that, with consideration of all the garbage that's been spewing from Ashcroft's mouth as of late, I had to do a double take and search frantically for the banana icon. :)

That was Onion-esque, which is, perhaps, the highest accolade I can bestow.

-K
the real Soccer War (4.66 / 6) (#90)
by danny on Fri Jun 21, 2002 at 09:23:59 PM EST

There were other factors involved, but soccer was one of the spark points for the 1969 "Soccer War" between Honduras and El Salvador. There's a short account here and a longer slightly dramatised writeup here.
Tensions peaked around the June 1969 World Cup playoffs between the two countries, and erupted into war on July 14. Throughout the four-day war, the only organized call for peace was a rally staged by the Salvadoran Communist Party in San Salvador.

The "Soccer War," as it came to be known, left 3,000 dead, 6,000 wounded and caused $50 million in damage.

Danny.
[900 book reviews and other stuff]

Funny...dangerously so (2.66 / 3) (#96)
by datawolf on Sat Jun 22, 2002 at 12:24:38 AM EST

The only dangerous thing about this is that adding Germany to an "axis" is bad....might upset germans about bringing up their unfortunate psycho-led past.  (NOTE TO HITLER...YOUR HAIR WAS BROWN AS WERE YOUR EYES!  GOOD THING YOU KILLED YOURSELF!)  As for soccer....I can't stand it.  Glad a country that truly supports and enjoys soccer moved up rather than my good old USA...which just doesn't like a sport without some kinda non-subdued violence.  I still remember with happiness how I tried to convince my high school soccer team to be more violent, so they  might get more fans.  Americans crave violence.  Football, a total misnomer, is a good fix for that.  If you couldn't notice by now, I lost my train of thought, so no further wasting of your time will continue.
He doesn't have mind control, he's just really persuasive!
Of course we helped to add to the axis of evil (4.60 / 5) (#98)
by mami on Sat Jun 22, 2002 at 12:29:40 AM EST

It's the only way to get Americans hooked to the game.

If they loose, they are so mad that they simply HAVE to beat us next time. Good, so we know they will come back and play with us underlings of common people around the world.

If they win, they will be so outrageously happy, that they can't help but wanting this "high" over and over again. Good, so we know, they you will come back and play with us underlings of common people around the world again.

Ashcroft needs to understand that there is a worldwide conspiracy to get the US hooked into the soccer war, because we underlings of common people think it's a good idea to replace the war against terror with the war against the kraut's goalkeeper.

He needs to learn that worldwide conspiracies can only be fought by joining them. That's the only way to win and beat the conspirators, from the inside out, disguised as equals among equals.

So I ask to call back the black hawk's daisy cutters and CP's smart bombs, because they ain't no good to shoot one little lousy goal, dudes.

"World" Series indeed (3.66 / 3) (#100)
by miguel on Sat Jun 22, 2002 at 02:16:56 AM EST

I remember annoucers making cracks about how it really was a world series when the toronto blue jays made it to the WS.

I want you to be free

What no poll ? (5.00 / 6) (#109)
by salsaman on Sat Jun 22, 2002 at 06:03:45 AM EST

Should we bomb Germany:

a) Back to the Stone Age

b) Back to the Bronze Age

c) Back to the Middle Ages

d) Back to the Triassic Period

d) Back to Tueday teatime



s/Tueday/Tuesday (5.00 / 1) (#110)
by salsaman on Sat Jun 22, 2002 at 06:05:28 AM EST

n/t

[ Parent ]
Renaissance (3.66 / 3) (#111)
by axxackall on Sat Jun 22, 2002 at 09:27:53 AM EST

bomb it with culture and science back to Renaissance.

[ Parent ]
Soccer vs. American Football (3.33 / 3) (#120)
by Nice2Cats on Sun Jun 23, 2002 at 07:29:50 AM EST

As an American who grew up in Germany, I've been spending the last years explaining two things to both sides:

One: Soccer is probably the best team sport in the world to play yourself. You only need minimal infrastructure - a flat surface (your street), four markers for the goal posts (your backpacks), and something more or less round as the ball (the tennis ball that your neighbor's dog chews on). You don't have to be two meters tall, built like a dump truck, or faster than a speeding bullet, and if one guy on your team drags his feet for a while, it doesn't ruin the game like in volleyball or football. Even a drunken moron can understand the rules, and you don't really get hurt. Sure, your shins get banged up and your knees are scabbed, but you can send you kid to training without worrying about him coming back with a broken neck.

Two: Soccer is without doubt the most boring spectator sport on the planet. I flatly refuse to watch games that are not part of some final round, because soccer games can and often end with in a draw, and if you are really lucky, a goalless draw. Most Americans are not aware that the soccer referees are amateurs, which you really notice during this World Cup: Italy and Spain can both claim with some justification that they were kicked out not by the opposing team, but by poor calls. The only good thing about watching soccer on TV is that you can do all kinds of stuff at the same time without having to worry that you are missing much.

Since the Americans are getting more contact with soccer, and the Europeans are getting more contact with American Football, two things are happening:

One: The U.S. has finally come up with a decent soccer team. If you have a population of 250+ million people (compared with about 80 million for Germany) where just about everybody plays soccer at some point in school, you're going to come up with a good team sooner or later. I don't think they will be Brazil-class anytime soon, but we're now up their with Ireland and Spain instead of down there with Saudi-Arabia and Kenya.

Two: Germans are, slowly but surely, watching more and more American Football. The NFL World Bowl on Saturday (which our home team, Berlin Thunder, won, by the way) attracted about 53,000 spectators. That might not sound like that much, but there were two World Cup soccer matches on that day, televised live, as well as Formula One training. That's stiff competition. More and more Germans watch Football, which is somewhat amazing considering they are not used to games with rules that are so complex. The added bonus is that there is no spectator violence with American Football. There is no way in hell I'm going to take a kid to a professional soccer match in Germany. The fans at American Football games are civilized, while soccer fans tend to be, well, only slight above the Neanderthal stage even when not drunk.

You can have the best of both worlds: Play soccer, watch American Football.



Sport Violence or Spectator Violence (none / 0) (#121)
by Grax on Sun Jun 23, 2002 at 12:06:12 PM EST

Some comments refer to the American's appreciation for violent sports over less violent ones. I would much rather watch violent people on the field with a non-violent crowd than watch non-violent people on the field with a violent crowd.

Well then.. (none / 0) (#122)
by ajduk on Mon Jun 24, 2002 at 04:11:52 AM EST

Why not watch Rugby?  Generally, the fans are not violent (heavuly drunk, maybe, but not violent), and it's a much more violent sport than American football, played without any of this wussy protective gear.

[ Parent ]
Yes! (none / 0) (#125)
by special ed on Mon Jun 24, 2002 at 11:12:50 AM EST

I mean, you certainly don't get American football fans acting violently!  Say, for instance, throwing bottles of beer at referees because they felt a bad call had been made.
Nope, certainly don't see that sort of thing.

Riots in the streets over who won a championship?  That sort of thing NEVER happens.  Don't know why I even bring it up.

Meanwhile, the world turns foolishly on and ants tickle his butt.
[ Parent ]

Believe it or not... (none / 0) (#123)
by tonyenkiducx on Mon Jun 24, 2002 at 07:53:06 AM EST

..but the Americans are watching more and more football(Soccer). Consider these viewing figures from the ESPN network..

NBA Finals : 10.8 million viewers.
NHL final five round games : 3.6 million viewers(On average).
The 1-1 draw against south korea(Shown at 2:30AM) : 1.36 million viewers.

Also take into consideration that American is currently pointing all its sporting attention at the NBA and NHL seasons, that came to an end halfway through the group stages. AND those figures dont include any of the spanish networks, that could almost double the figures.

The highest viewing figures for a football(Soccer) match before this world cup, were 539,000. Going on these figure, in four years time more americans will watch a world cup match, than will watch the NHL finals round..

Tony.
I see a planet where love is foremost, where war is none existant. A planet of peace, and a planet of understanding. I see a planet called utopia. And I see us invading that planet, because they'd never expect it
German figures (none / 0) (#131)
by goflin on Mon Jun 24, 2002 at 04:03:25 PM EST

Four your interest: TV stations in Germany get about at least 15 to 20 Million viewers for a world championship football game (some might call it 'soccer'), though most people should be working at 8.30, or 13.30 (Broadcasting time in this time zone). The record is held by a game in 1990 at the Italian World Championship: 40 Million viewers. Compare that to a population little more than 80 million! goflin

[ Parent ]
Bombing Berlin is suspended (none / 0) (#124)
by rook on Mon Jun 24, 2002 at 10:17:16 AM EST

As well informed persons announced, the comming attack of Berlin is suspended because of the following reason: This attack would compromise the subversive long-term attack with so called "smarter bombs" (Microsoft products to torpedo the german economy, Hollywood movies to slobber the germans brain and junk food to demolish the imun system). So why the US-Guys lost this holly battle? One group of insiders belive it's another evidence of the international anti-amerikan conspiration. Other security experts predict, the US-Guys had too much hamburger, bad sex and hollywood movies.

5-1 (5.00 / 4) (#126)
by Jamie Roquai on Mon Jun 24, 2002 at 12:41:03 PM EST

Nice one - reminds me of this (refers to England's tromping of Germany en route to the WC 2002), though the American users may not appreciate it.... Universal Pictures announced today they plan to make a film of the momentous football match that took place on Saturday. "Five-One" is the tentative title of what could be next year's big summer hit, depicting the American national soccer team's stunning victory over Germany. Nicholas Cage heads an all star cast as the captain of the brave US Soccer team haunted by the trauma of losing in the 2000 World Cup final on penalties and the death of his wife in a riot caused by English football hooligans, and finds love in the arms of a female sports journalist played by Julia Roberts. Mel Gibson is the no-nonsense Swedish coach who leads them to glory, with Keanu Reeves, Ben Affleck, Matt Damon and Will Smith playing some of Cage's heroic team mates. Jeremy Irons is set to star as Sir Nigel Villiers-Smythe, the dastardly Englishman who coaches the German team and forces them to play with poisoned-tipped studs to try and cheat the heroic American team out of victory. Director Steven Spielberg defended the film-makers' decision to focus on the American contribution to the victory over Germany and inaccurate and even imagined events in the story, saying, "Obviously we've had to take some artistic licence to make the story work on film, but I hope that what we produce will be true to the spirit of what happened on that famous night."

Funnier than the article! [nt] (none / 0) (#138)
by ventonegro on Tue Jun 25, 2002 at 02:14:02 PM EST


--
VentoNegro
"Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, so why should we let them have ideas?" -- Josef Stalin
[ Parent ]
Anecdote (4.00 / 2) (#127)
by pmk on Mon Jun 24, 2002 at 01:02:16 PM EST

The British mountain climber Chris Bonington tells the story of being stuck in the Himalayas during a snowstorm with his buddy Don Whillens (sp?). They bivouacked for a while, then eventually found a tent with some German climbers in it who were kind enough to let them in and sit the storm out.

They had a radio receiver and were listening to Indian coverage of the World Cup. The news came in that Germany had beaten England. "Ha!" cried the Germans. "We've beaten you at your national pastime!"

"That's okay," said Whillens. "We beat you twice at yours."

Yeah, but.... (none / 0) (#137)
by ventonegro on Tue Jun 25, 2002 at 01:36:53 PM EST

No way the British could have done that without a lot of of help...
--
VentoNegro
"Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, so why should we let them have ideas?" -- Josef Stalin
[ Parent ]
Crap! (none / 0) (#128)
by Dphitz on Mon Jun 24, 2002 at 02:10:14 PM EST

Does this mean if I buy a VW Jetta or Bug then G.W. Bush will accuse me of helping terrorists?


God, please save me . . . from your followers

Sao Paolo (none / 0) (#136)
by ventonegro on Tue Jun 25, 2002 at 01:33:17 PM EST

Did Tony Blair mean So Paulo?
--
VentoNegro
"Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, so why should we let them have ideas?" -- Josef Stalin
Gayness. (1.00 / 1) (#142)
by micmatic on Fri Jun 28, 2002 at 12:23:47 PM EST

The one most plausible reason to me why soccer/football is widely considered as being gay by US people is probably the fact that they used to suck at it. And you dont like a sport you cant play.

Let's take a look at Baseball (mind you, I have actually come to appreciate the sport).. but think of the impression it leaves on foreigners like me: guys in stripy tights holding their sticks ?
Who are you calling gay !?

To any person unfamiliar with the nuances of any such sport -- be it baseball, football or cricket -- it would appear ultimately boring and slow.
Europeans so far cant seem to grasp the excitment in a sport where 80% of the game consists of time outs.

(The real reason for the increasing popularity of american football in europe, or germany in particular, where I'm from, are the cheerleaders and the 'coolness' of posing with an american sport.)

But back to real football:

Just like any other sport soccer has had its attempts in making the game faster and more intresting by promoting offensive gameplay, however hesitantly: about 10 years ago the number of substitutions per game was raised from 2 to 3, as well as allowing an injured goalkeeper to be replaced even after 3 subs had been made. This is hopelessly useless if you ask me, with 22 guys on the pitch and usually reserved for injuries or 'letting the rookies on' during the last 5 minutes of a match.
Around the same time a rule was introduced that prohibited a keeper from touching a ball with his hands when being passed to by a teammate. But everyone quickly accomodated to that and it never really brought the desired effect.

From what I realize, the single most effective and desirable change in the game I could ever think of is simply allowing for unlimited substitutions in a game.

As a European I have played lots of soccer, natch. And trust me, its an exhausting game. Any game is of course, but with soccer the most exhausting part is basically just moving around on the pitch without ever touching the ball 95% of the time. And you have to move around alot. The field is big and youre constantly keeping up with the guy thats trying to get away from you. So usually you're already dragged out after 10 mins of play (even as a pro), or, by saving your energy for later use, you drag the game along by being too defensive and tactical, which makes it boring for spectators and players alike.

The concept of football in itself is great. It's easy to learn, easy to play but allows for complex development of skill and strategy.

One exciting aspect of soccer I have come to enjoy over the past years (as its becoming more popular) is indoor soccer, especially with the german league organizing a huge tournament each winter during the break featuring all 1st and 2nd division clubs as well as some of the best amateur clubs and selected foreign clubs to compete in single-day tourneys -- including first rounds, playoffs and finals -- all over the country which ultimately have a dozen teams qualify for the big tournament usually staged in Berlin.

What you see there is soccer how I like it: fast paced, continuous action, few referee calls, innovative gameplay and tricky shots, as well as high scoring of course.
They allow for unlimited substitutions and theres only 5 guys on a smaller pitch, plus a keeper. The clock is being stopped I think, and there is no out of bounds.

Thats what I like to see, and also how I prefer playing it myself.

The problem to faster and more high-scoring gameplay in regular soccer remains to be the limitation on substitions. It's just a drag really and things would be a lot different if a player could just go out and rest for 5 or 10 minutes and then go back in.

I know it works. As amateurs we often used to play like that and games usually ended up with higher scoring, sometimes in the double-digits on the same size of a pitch.

They should just introduce that at some point. No need for bigger goals or reluctantly moving some lines around on the field. Also, offside-calling will have to be much fairer. 2 out of 3 offside-calls are wrong and against the scorer -- especially with picky calls in a game where you arent measuring in centimetres -- that really doesnt promote offensive football much.

Germany added to Bush's 'Axis of Evil' | 143 comments (125 topical, 18 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!