Filed under: 2026 World Cup expanded to 48 teams, Uncategorized | Tags: 1982 World Cup in Spain, 2014 World Cup in Brazil, 2018 World Cup in Russia, 2026 World Cup, Africa, Angola, Argentina, Asia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Brazil, Canada, China, CONCACAF, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Egypt, England, Europe, FIFA, FIFA Executive Committee, FIFA governing council, France, Germany, Gianni Infantino, Hungary, Italy, Jordan, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, North Korea, Oceania, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Serbia & Montenegro, Slovenia, South America, Spain, Sunil Gulati, Sweden, Togo, Trinidad & Tobago, Tunisia, United States, Uruguay, Yugoslavia
The 2026 World Cup will have 48 teams.
The move from 32 teams to four dozen was approved unanimously by the FIFA governing council, an expansion of world soccer’s championship tournament that was welcomed by supporters as a victory for inclusion but criticized by others as another cynical, money-driven effort by an organization still in the throes of a financial and ethical scandal.
The percentage of the expansion will be the largest ever, from the original 16 (1930-78) to 24 (1982-94) to 32 (1998-2022). More teams mean more matches, in this case an increase from 64 games to 80. It also means greater revenue: the 2018 World Cup in Russia is expected to pull in $5.5 billion through television rights, sponsorships and tickets; the 48-nation ’26 cup will bring in an additional billion. Some of the expected increased profit–approximately $640 million–will find its way into the coffers of soccer’s six continental confederations and–presumably–on to FIFA’s 211 member national federations.
New FIFA boss Gianni Infantino had pushed for the change in 2016 when he ran for the presidency in an effort to include more nations and invigorate what was already the world’s most popular sporting event.
But critics contend that opening the World Cup doors to lesser soccer-playing nations will result in a weaker tournament, with nearly a quarter of FIFA’s membership reaching its most prestigious competition every four years and more matches crammed into an already crowded international calendar. Infantino was unconcerned. “We are in the 21st century, and we have to shape the football World Cup of the 21st century,” he said after the vote. “Football is more than just Europe and South America. Football is global.”
For Russia ’18, Europe, as usual, will have the lion’s share of berths, 13, plus the automatic slot that goes to the host nation. Ten-nation South America gets four berths, as does 47-nation Asia. Africa’s 56 members will battle for five slots. CONCACAF gets three. The 31st and 32nd berths will go to the winners of home-and-home playoffs between CONCACAF and Asian also-rans and between the Oceania winner and a South American also-ran. A decision on how the 2026 pie will be sliced will be made in May. [January 10]
Comment: No surprise here. A huge expansion of the World Cup field for 2026 became inevitable with Infantino’s early Christmas present to the likes of Asia, Africa, CONCACAF and Oceania: release of a 65-page analysis by a FIFA in-house group of five options in growing the World Cup. The 48-team concept was rated best (and most profitable), with 16–sixteen!–groups of three teams each playing round-robin to open the tournament. Another 48-team format called for a 32-team knockout round, followed by a group stage involving the 16 survivors and 16 seeded teams, for 80 total games. Then there was the idea of 40 teams divided into eight groups of five and, in the end, 88 games played. Or, 40 teams with 10 groups of four for a total of 76 games.
The opposition, not surprisingly, was led by the European Club Association, which represents 220 clubs on the Continent. It called the present 32-team format “the perfect formula from all perspectives.” The ECA added, “We understand that this decision has been taken based on political reasons rather than sporting ones and under considerable political pressure, something ECA believes is regrettable.”
The FIFA analysis indeed conceded the expansion would diminish the level of play at that World Cup, but it also explicitly stated that the FIFA governing council must make its decision purely for “sporting” reasons. But back to reality.
While Option No. 2 (an opening knockout round involving 32 teams, with the losers going home after one match), may seem ridiculous, what the governing council–the body created to replace the greedy, seedy and disgraced Executive Committee–settled on is only slightly better. Expansion itself is a bad idea. Despite three expansions since the late 1970s, the World Cup has remained a relatively compact monthlong festival of soccer. The approved 48-team formula would mean a reasonable increase by one or two days to 32; the two finalists would still play the customary seven games; and the usual 12 stadiums would be required of the host nation(s). But the addition of no-hopers only means an erosion in the level of play and a resulting decline in interest among the general public. If Brasil ’14 had been expanded to 48, the tournament might have included the likes Egypt, Tunisia, and Jordan–and the forgettable matches they were likely to contribute. As for inclusion, today’s 32-team format has already allowed otherwise outsiders Trinidad & Tobago, China, Slovenia, Angola, North Korea, New Zealand, Tunisia, Togo and Saudi Arabia to have their day in the sun, not to mention splinters from the former Yugoslavia–Serbia & Montenegro (2006), Serbia (’10) and Bosnia & Herzegovina (’14).
Beyond concerns over the drop in level of play, the 16 x 3 format given FIFA’s blessing contains a serious flaw. Forty-eight teams divided into 16 groups of three might require penalty-kick tiebreakers after drawn matches in the first round to ensure there is a “winner.” After all, there has to be a brutally quick method to determine a group’s top two finishers and send the third-place team home. That radical change to how the opening round of a World Cup is run also would be necessary to prevent teams from conspiring to arrange a favorable result in the final group game.
Just what we need: More chances for PK tiebreakers to rear their ugly head before a global audience. And more of just what we need: A reprise of the three-team group, with each team playing just two games. That was tried at Espana ’82, the first go-round with a 24-team field, when four three-team groups followed the first round and those group winners advanced to the semifinals. Three teams playing two matches each promised nothing more than mostly defensive, nervy encounters that would please no one, and while there was Italy’s classic 3-2 win over favored Brazil, the 12 games averaged less than 2 1/2 goals–a half goal fewer than the tournament average–and included three scoreless draws. Happily, that format was jettisoned for Mexico ’86 in favor of the now-familiar 16-team knockout second round.
There’s also the matter of what the bigger field will mean to the qualifying competition for ’26. If Europe and South America gain only a couple of extra berths, the traditional powers there will have even less to fear. Even in CONCACAF, the U.S. and Mexico, which survived a mighty scare before slipping into the 2014 World Cup, have no worries. And with still less drama during what is an interminable qualifying process, the fans lose.
Finally, the expansion in ’26 also will mean a greater burden on the host, which will have to find accommodations and training facilities for an additional 16 teams, a new consideration that will hike the organizing nation’s bill from $2 billion to $2.3 billion. That’s why there has been talk of the job of hosting that first 48-team event going to the triumvirate of the United States, Mexico and Canada. Informal talks among the three have already begun. The decision will be made in May 2020, and FIFA’s World Cup rotation among the continents would put North America in line to host. Fueling the speculation is that Infantino owes U.S. Soccer President Sunil Gulati, who was instrumental in getting the Swiss-Italian elected FIFA boss in February. There’s also the matter of the now-disgraced FIFA Executive Committee having given the U.S. the shaft in 2010 when it chose to award the 2022 World Cup to Qatar, ignoring the stronger American bid. But beyond ’26, FIFA will have created a monster event that few potential hosts can handle. Potential hosts like . . . China, which, on the heels of its 2008 Beijing Olympics, is keen to play host to the world’s biggest single-sport event.
There can be no denying that the soccer-playing world is a much more level playing field today than it was back in the days when the World Cup was an exclusive club of 16. You could start with surprise packages like Costa Rica, which at Brasil ’14 stunned Uruguay and Italy and tied England before nipping Greece on penalty kicks in the second round and bowing in the quarterfinals to the Netherlands, 4-3 on PKs, after a brave scoreless draw. But the World Cup remains a competition won by only eight nations–Brazil, Germany, Italy, Uruguay, Argentina, Spain, England and France–and the list of worthy also-rans remains limited to the Dutch; Hungary of long ago; Czechoslovakia, which no longer exists; and, in a bit of a stretch, Sweden. That’s it. Infantino’s gambit does nothing more than give hope to the hopeless and directs those extra one billion bucks into FIFA’s coffers at the final accounting of the 2026 World Cup. And for the fans, if gives them countless more forgettable, hardly watchable matches between giants and minnows under the guise of FIFA World Cup soccer. And World Cup games, even those not so great, should be somewhat memorable.
In the end, the winner is Infantino. His act of patronage has placed dozens of soccer’s have-not nations in his debt, and when it comes to FIFA presidential elections, it’s a one-nation, one-vote world. His power base is assured.
Filed under: U.S. Women's Olympic Soccer Team, Uncategorized | Tags: 2016 Rio de Janeiro Olympics, Alex Morgan, Algarve Cup, Athens, Atlanta, Barcelona, Canada, Carli Lloyd, Colombia, CONCACAF, Costa Rica, Crystal Dunn, Diego Simeone, England, France, Frisco, Houston, Hungary, International Olympic Committee, Ivan Zamorano, Los Angeles, Mexico, Paris, Portugal, Puerto Rico, Rivaldo, Ronaldinho, Ryan Giggs, Socca Princesses, St. Louis, Switzerland, Trinidad & Tobago, United States
The defending champion United States stormed into the 2016 Rio de Janeiro Olympic women’s soccer tournament, crushing Trinidad & Tobago, 5-0, in Houston in the semifinals of the CONCACAF qualifiers.
Canada defeated Costa Rica, 3-1, in its semifinal earlier in the day to secure the region’s other berth in Rio and set up a tournament championship match with the U.S. on February 21.
Forward Alex Morgan posted a hat trick against the Socca Princesses, eight days after she scored two goals–the first one in the 12th second–in the Americans’ group-opening 5-0 rout of Costa Rica in Frisco, Tex. Three days after the Costa Rica win, reigning FIFA World Player of the Year Carli Lloyd scored off a rebound of her own penalty kick in the 86th minute to allow the U.S. to squeeze past a bunkered-in Mexico, 1-0, and earn a spot in the semifinals. The Americans then won the group by pounding Puerto Rico, 10-0, on a night when young forward Crystal Dunn tied a U.S. women’s record with five goals.
The U.S., 17-0-1 all-time in Olympic qualifying, is seeking its fourth consecutive CONCACAF title against Canada, a team that is 3-46-6 all-time against it southern neighbor. [February 19]
Comment: Consider this the first time an American has suggested that the rest of the soccer-playing world deserves a break on the playing field at the expense of the United States.
That is, now that women’s soccer is a firmly established Olympic sport, it should be changed to a competition for players 22 and younger, with three over-age players per team. Just like the men.
Men’s soccer has had a roller coaster history in the Olympics. Its start was pretty ragged: scores from the very first modern Olympiad, Athens in 1896, have been lost, and the 1904 St. Louis Olympic tournament was a five-match affair involving club teams from Canada and the U.S. By Paris ’24, however, the event had grown into something of a world football championship, and after Uruguay dazzled in winning consecutive gold medals, FIFA was compelled to create its World Cup in 1930 so both amateurs and professionals could compete.
With the end of World War II came a long, dark period in which communist bloc countries, with their state-supported “amateur” athletes, dominated Olympic soccer. Hungary, for one, claimed three golds. It wasn’t until the 1984 Los Angeles Games that the International Olympic Committee allowed limited professionalism in soccer, and finally the other shoe dropped when the ’92 Barcelona tournament was transformed into an under-23 competition for players regardless of whether they are amateurs or professionals.
The IOC had resisted such a move because it feared a loss of interest in its cash cow event if it made it an age-specific competition. Such an event couldn’t possibly draw 1.4 million spectators, like it did at Los Angeles ’84. But there’s nothing in sports like the Olympics. And the three-overage player allowance gave Olympic spectators the chance to see old hands like Rivaldo, Ryan Giggs, Diego Simeone, Ronaldinho and Ivan Zamorano. It’s worked. Fans appear to have accepted an under-23 world championship–as long as it’s wrapped in the Olympic flag.
Now, the women–with the considerable pressure that FIFA could apply–would do well to follow suit. The first FIFA Women’s World Cup was played in 1991 in China; the first women’s Olympic tournament at Atlanta ’96. Since then we’ve had two competing women’s world soccer championships played on consecutive years followed by two off years, one a stand-alone event involving 24 nations and one half that big that’s buried among some two dozen other Olympic sporting events. Throw in the Algarve Cup, a prestigious 12-nation invitational tournament played every spring in Portugal, and the number of women’s “world soccer championships” is too many.
The 2015 FIFA Women’s World Cup in Canada demonstrated that there is a pipeline of nations challenging the established powers. Last year it was Colombia, Switzerland and Costa Rica, and in years past it was France and England and Canada. The women’s Olympic tournament, as a U-23 affair, could expedite that trend by giving the next wave of young standouts a major stage with something precious–an Olympic medal–as an incentive.
So, is this a major concession on the part of an American who’s seen his women’s national team win four of the first five Olympic golds (and lose a fifth to Norway because of a non-handball call in overtime on the deciding goal) to go along with three FIFA World Cup titles? No. The U.S., due to recent retirements, injuries and pregnancies, blew its way through CONCACAF to an Olympic berth this week with a 20-member team that averaged 24 years of age. The U.S. would be quite prepared for a world championship for under-23s.
A similar concession by an American regarding men’s soccer? Check back in, oh, say, 2116.
Filed under: Jordan Morris, Uncategorized | Tags: Ante Razov, Aron Johannsson, Bastian Schweinsteiger, Bobby Wood, Brazil, Canada, Clint Dempsey, Colombia, CONCACAF, Costa Rica, DaMarcus Beasley, Darlington Nagbe, DeAndre Yedlin, FIFA Confederations Cup, FIFA Under-20 World Cup, Foxboro, German Bundesliga, Germany, Gyasi Zardes, Hermann Trophy, Hertha Berlin, Holland, Jermaine Jones, John Brooks, Jordan Morris, Juergen Klinsmann, Kyle Beckerman, Landon Donovan, Liberia, Los Angeles Galaxy, Lukas Podolski, Matt Miazga, Mercer Island, Mexico, MLS Cup, NCAA Division I championship, Nelson Valdez, New Jersey, New York Red Bulls, Obafemi Martins, Per Mertesacker, Philipp Lahm, Port of Spain, Portland Timbers, Rio de Janeiro Olympics, Rose Bowl, Seattle Sounders, Sigi Schmid, St. Louis, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, Stanford University, Sunderland, Sunil Gulati, Tim Howard, Trinidad & Tobago, U.S. National Team, UCLA, Union Berlin, Werder Bremen, World Cup
Homegrown player Jordan Morris signed with the Seattle Sounders in a splashy ceremony at the team’s fan clubhouse in Pioneer Square, capping a whirlwind six weeks in which the 21-year-old striker led Stanford University to the 2015 NCAA Division I men’s national championship, was awarded the Hermann Trophy as the country’s top collegiate player and took part in a trial with Werder Bremen that left the German Bundesliga club poised to offer a contract.
Morris earned seven caps with the U.S. National Team last year, scoring in a 2-0 victory over Mexico in April and becoming the first college player to make an appearance with the full national team since UCLA forward Ante Razov in 1995. He also scored six goals and added four assists in 11 appearances in ’15 for the U.S. under-23 side, including two goals in a 3-1 victory over Canada in its opening qualifier for the ’16 Rio de Janeiro Olympics; that campaign will be decided in March with a home-and-home playoff with Colombia .
The signing of Morris reunites the Mercer Island, Wash., native with U.S. and Sounder striker Clint Dempsey. Sounder coach Sigi Schmid was delighted by Morris’ signing, saying he possesses “unteachable” qualities. The Sounder rookie, however, is expected to spend his first MLS season in a supporting role, watching Dempsey, Obafemi Martins and Nelson Valdez start ahead of him. [January 21]
Comment: Here comes Mr. Jordan, and possibly others. Can embattled U.S. National Team coach Juergen Klinsmann channel his inner 2006?
In recent months Klinsmann has been blessed by an interesting wave of fresh young talent. Before the broad-shouldered, baby-faced Morris there was another forward, Bobby Wood, 23, a promising poacher who scored late winners in friendlies against Holland and Germany last spring, plus equalizers against Mexico in the CONCACAF playoff and the World Cup qualifying opener against St. Vincent & the Grenadines. Wood continues to produce for his club, Union Berlin of the Bundesliga 2. There’s also midfielder Darlington Nagbe. Born in Liberia, raised in the U.S., the 25-year-old naturalized American made his U.S. debut against St. Vincent & the Grenadines and dazzled in leading the Portland Timbers to their first MLS Cup title. Finally, defender Matt Miazga, 6-foot-4 and a mere 20. He went from buried on the New York Red Bulls roster last spring to becoming one of MLS’s best central defenders in ’15. Before bowing in with the full national team in the St. Vincent match, Miaza helped the U.S. reach the quarterfinals of the FIFA Under-20 World Cup and became a starter on the U-23 team.
Then there are youngsters who appeared in the 2014 World Cup: defender John Brooks, 23, of Hertha Berlin, defender-midfielder DeAndre Yedlin, 22, of Sunderland, and forward Aron Johannsson, 25, of Werder Bremen. Johannsson battled injuries in 2015 but Yedlin and another attacking player, Gyasi Zardes, 24, of the Los Angeles Galaxy, appeared in 19 of the USA’s 20 matches in ’15.
Is this the cavalry thundering down the hill? Klinsmann can only hope so. Dempsey is 32. Defensive midfielders Jermaine Jones and Kyle Beckerman and left back DaMarcus Beasley are 33. Goalkeeper Tim Howard is 36.
Klinsmann, in his fifth year as national team coach, is on a hot seat, becoming the first national team coach in this soccer-averse country to experience a modicum of public scrutiny. In 2015, after historic wins against the Netherlands in Amsterdam and Germany in Cologne, the U.S. stumbled badly at the CONCACAF Gold Cup, finishing fourth, its worst showing in a Gold Cup in 15 years. A humiliating 4-1 loss to Brazil in Foxboro followed, which served as a warm-up (or down) to the lifeless 3-2 overtime defeat to Mexico in a CONCACAF playoff at the Rose Bowl that cost the Americans a berth in the 2017 FIFA Confederations Cup. Three days later the U.S. tumbled to Costa Rica, 1-0, in a friendly in New Jersey, but it salvaged the year by opening a new World Cup cycle by routing St. Vincent & the Grenadines, 6-1, in St. Louis and escaping Port of Spain with a scoreless draw and a point against Trinidad & Tobago.
As the mixed results mounted, Klinsmann came under increasing criticism for his often baffling player selections, his lineups (20 different lineups in 20 games), his tinkering with formations (a 3-5-2, a 4-2-3-1, a flat 4-4-2 and a diamond 4-4-2) and tactics. At one point, former U.S. star Landon Donovan said that Klinsmann should lose his job if Mexico won at the Rose Bowl. The U.S. lost, and Klinsmann got a half-hearted vote of confidence from USSF President Sunil Gulati.
This cavalry of young talent may yield a couple of riders or, in Klinsmann’s dreams, a full platoon. And what the U.S. coach does with it will determine the course of the national team for the near-term, although it figures to be closing in on a 2018 World Cup berth when 2017 dawns. He’s nurtured young talent before, steering a bunch of young Germans to third place at the 2006 World Cup, becoming a national hero in the bargain. Among his players were defenders Philipp Lahm, then 22, and Per Mertesacker, 21, midfielder Bastian Schweinsteiger, 21, and forward Lukas Podolski, 21. That was a generation of talent that would go on to win the 2014 World Cup.
Can Klinsmann do it again? He could succeed. He could fail. This new crop–and possibly others to emerge over the next 18 months–could win in spite of him. Or too many of them could prove to be all false promise. Time will tell. But for the U.S. to nail down a World Cup berth and go into Russia ’18 with any hope of a better showing than the last World Cup, Klinsmann is going to have to succeed, and once again engineer a successful changing of the guard.
Filed under: 2015 CONCACAF Gold Cup, Uncategorized | Tags: 2015 CONCACAF Gold Cup, 2017 FIFA Confederations Cup, 2018 World Cup, Andres Guardado, Aston Villa, Blackburn, Brad Friedel, Brazil '14, Brondby IF, Canada, Canaleros, Catrachos, Chester, Columbus Crew, Costa Rica, Cuba, Darren Mattocks, Denmark, El-Tri, England, Fox Sports, Galatasaray, Honduras, Ian Darke, Jamaica, Jesus Corona, John Harkes, Lincoln Financial Field, Liverpool, Major League Soccer, Marcelo Balboa, Mexico, Michael Bradley, Michael Hector, New Zealand, Newcastle United, Oribe Peralta, Panama, Pasadena, Paul Aguilar, Philadelphia, PPL Park, Reggae Boyz, Rose Bowl, Russia, Soca Warriors, Taylor Trellman, Ticos, Timmy Chandler, Tottenham, Trinidad & Tobago, Turkey, U.S., UCLA
Mexico shook off its funk and stormed to its seventh CONCACAF Gold Cup title, defeating upstart Jamaica, 3-1, in the final before a partisan sellout crowd of 68,930 at Philadelphia’s Lincoln Financial Field.
Andres Guardado opened the scoring in the 31st minute with a spectacular left-footed volley off a cross by Paul Aguilar. That ended a frustrating 272-minute stretch in which the Mexicans had failed to score from anywhere but the penalty spot. Jesus Corona, voted the Gold Cup’s top young player, increased the lead to 2-0 two minutes into the second half after stealing a ball from Michael Hector, and in the 61st minute Oribe Peralta capitalized on another blunder by Hector to put the match out of reach. Darren Mattocks got the Reggae Boyz a consolation goal in the 81st.
The triumph earned El Tri a playoff with the U.S. on October 10 at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, Calif., with a berth in the 2017 FIFA Confederations Cup at stake.
The U.S. won the 2013 Gold Cup and could have secured a trip outright to the Confederations Cup in Russia by winning the ’15 tournament, but the Americans were defeated by Jamaica, 2-1, in the semifinals and then sagged to a loss to Panama in the third-place game at PPL Park in Chester, Penn., bowing on penalty kicks, 3-2, after a 1-1 draw. [July 26]
Comment I: An aberration? No climactic meeting of the U.S. and Mexico in the final, as the tournament promoters had hoped? Perhaps. Maybe we’ll know as early as the autumn of 2017, when the CONCACAF qualifiers for the 2018 World Cup conclude. But the balance of power in CONCACAF continues to shift, and the hold of Mexico and the U.S. on the top two rungs continues to erode, by degrees.
The Mexicans needed all of three late penalty-kick calls in the quarterfinals and semifinals to reach the championship match (thanks to Guardado, they converted them all). The Americans failed to impress in group play, buried a Cuban team decimated by defections in the second round, then went back to failing to impress thereafter and were rewarded with a deserved fourth-place finish.
Are Jamaica and Panama that good? Of course not. Neither is Costa Rica, Honduras or Trinidad & Tobago. The most recent FIFA World Rankings placed the Reggae Boyz at No. 55, the Canaleros at No. 65, the Ticos at No. 38, the Catrachos at No. 81, and the Soca Warriors at No. 56.
Fortunately for the U.S. (29th) and Mexico (26th), while CONCACAF’s World Cup qualifiers remain a challenge–with road matches ranging from headaches to nightmares–the outcome has been similar over the past five campaigns: The Americans and El Tri qualify and are joined by . . . who? For 1998, it was Jamaica, in its World Cup debut. For ’02, Costa Rica. For ’06, it was the Costa Ricans and, for the first time, Trinidad & Tobago. For 2010, Honduras qualified, and for Brazil ’14 it was Costa Rica and Honduras. It’s like a game of Whack a Mole, as first one CONCACAF contender pops out of its hole, then ducks back down and a different one pops up.
And so the battle for the region’s 3 1/2 berths at the 2018 World Cup heats up this fall, and everyone has the U.S. and Mexico with boarding passes to Russia. Many in the media describe the October playoff between the two at the Rose Bowl as being very important because the winner goes on to the 2017 FIFA Confederations Cup in Russia, “something of a dress rehearsal for the next World Cup.” But the U.S. or Mexico might–just might–go to Russia dress rehearsing for nothing.
Because if there was any proof that there’s no longer a sure thing in CONCACAF, it came in late 2013, when Mexico shockingly finished fourth in the World Cup qualifiers and had to sweat out a playoff with New Zealand to punch its ticket to Brazil. (Were it not for two U.S. stoppage-time goals at Panama in the region’s final round, Mexico would have been eliminated for the first time since 1934–when the eliminators happened to be the Americans.) And as CONCACAF nations evolve, there’s nothing to say that Costa Rica, a surprise World Cup quarterfinalist in ’14; Honduras, a semifinalist in the previous two Gold Cups; Panama and Jamaica; and even Trinidad & Tobago; don’t all pop out of their mole holes during a single World Cup cycle, leaving the U.S. and/or Mexico on the outside looking in. Heck, don’t count out Canada (No. 101), which won the 2000 Gold Cup, finished third in ’02 and now has a generation of players developing in Major League Soccer.
Comment II: The USA’s breakout star during the tournament was a recent retiree. Timmy Chandler was a disaster, Michael Bradley disappointed, but former U.S. goalkeeper Brad Friedel, as a television color commentator, proved to be a find for Fox Sports during its Gold Cup coverage as it gears up for much bigger assignments, from CONCACAF World Cup qualifying beginning late this year to Russia 2018 itself.
Friedel gives you the whole field, as a goalkeeper should, but he also gives you the whole picture and speaks with the authority of a player who’s gone from the top collegiate level (UCLA) to MLS (Columbus Crew) to national team (82 caps, two World Cups) to international clubs (Brondby IF of Denmark, Newcastle United of England, Galatasaray of Turkey, and Liverpool, Blackburn, Aston Villa and Tottenham, all of England). He’s quick, articulate, witty and enthusiastic about the U.S. without losing his credibility–no easy task during this transitory period in soccer’s history in this country. And unlike most of his predecessors, he compliments his play-by-play partner, instead of making him work.
Friedel is far better than a long line of ex-U.S. internationals who’d hoped to be the second banana in a national soccer broadcast booth for the next couple of decades. Friedel is better than John Harkes, he’s better than Marcelo Balboa, and he’s better than the insufferable Taylor Trellman, whose partner, the outstanding play-by-play man Ian Darke, must dread going to work. Friedel’s, literally, a keeper.
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: 1980 Moscow Games, 1980 Winter Olympics, 2010 World Cup, 2014 World Cup, ABC, Aleksandr Kerzhakov, Argentina, Bear, Brent Goulet, Cold War, Commonwealth of Independent States, CONCACAF, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Detroit, Eagle, East Germany, Egypt, England, European Championship, European Group "F", Fabio Capello, FIFA, FIFA World Rankings, Frank Klopas, Huntington Sheraton Hotel, Iran, Italy, John Doyle, John Harkes, Joseph Blatter, Juergen Klinsmann, Kevin Crow, Krasnodar, Kuban Stadium, Lake Placid, Libya, Los Angeles Olympics, Miami, Miracle on Grass, Miracle on Ice, Moscow, North American Soccer League, Norway, Orlando, Palo Alto, Pasadena, Paul Caligiuri, Peter Vermes, Port of Spain, Rick Davis, Roman Shirokov, Rose Bowl, Russia, San Francisco, Seattle, Seoul Olympic Games, Stanford Stadium, Tab Ramos, Taegu, Trinidad & Tobago, U.S. National Team, USSR, Victor Faizulin, West Germany, Zenit Saint Petersburg
The U.S. National Team will close out 2012 with a Wednesday, November 14, friendly against Russia at Kuban Stadium in Krasnodar.
The Russians, No. 9 in the current FIFA World Rankings, are coming off a frustrating first-round exit at this year’s European Championship, while the Americans, ranked 27th, are 9-2-2 in 2012 and a tie away from posting their best single-year record in their history. [November 12]
Comment: This could be a useful exercise for both sides. Russia, led by the Zenit Saint Petersburg trio of Victor Faizulin, Roman Shirokov and Aleksandr Kerzhakov, leads European Group “F” in qualifying for the 2014 World Cup and has gone 4-0-0–all by shutout–under coach Fabio Capello, who last faced the U.S. at the 2010 World Cup as England boss. As for the U.S., coach Juergen Klinsmann will use the opportunity to tinker yet again before his side begins the final round of CONCACAF qualifiers for Brasil ’14 in February.
But this game will hardly go down as historic. The Cold War is a distant memory, and the two countries now keep one another at arm’s length, a frozen smile on their faces. There have been meetings, but nothing of consequence:
o February 3, 1979, U.S. 1, USSR 3, in Seattle
o February 11, 1979, U.S. 1, USSR 4, in San Francisco
o February 24, 1990, U.S. 1, USSR 3, in Palo Alto, CA
o November 21, 1990, U.S. 0, USSR 0, in Port of Spain, Trinidad & Tobago
o January 25, 1992, U.S. 0, Commonwealth of Independent States 1, in Miami
o February 2, 1992, U.S. 2, Commonwealth of Independent States 1, in Detroit
o February 13, 1993, U.S. 0, Russia 1, in Orlando
o February 21, 1993, U.S. 0, Russia 0, in Palo Alto, CA
o January 29, 1994, U.S. 1, Russia 1, in Seattle
o April 26, 2000, Russia 2, U.S. 0, in Moscow
All friendlies, of course, with the Soviets/CIS’ers/Russians holding a solid 6-1-3 advantage. The only competitive match between the Eagle and Bear was played September 22, 1988, in Taegu during the Seoul Olympic Games. The U.S., featuring North American Soccer League old-timers Rick Davis and Kevin Crow and up-and-comers like Paul Caligiuri, Tab Ramos, John Harkes, Frank Klopas and Peter Vermes, had played Argentina and host South Korea to ties but needed at least a high-scoring draw against the Soviets to advance to the knockout round for the first time in its Olympic history. Despite goals by John Doyle and substitute Brent Goulet, the USA lost, 4-2.
There might have been a game of real significance, however–a real Cold War potboiler–had the stars not mis-aligned four years earlier.
In 1984, the U.S., as host, held an automatic berth in the Los Angeles Olympic soccer tournament. At the draw conducted that spring by FIFA at the plush Huntington Sheraton Hotel in Pasadena, CA–a stone’s throw from the Rose Bowl, site of the final–media members and guests gasped when it was revealed that the USA had been drawn into the same first-round group with the Soviet Union. Visions of a Miracle on Grass, a redux of the Americans’ titanic upset of the USSR in ice hockey at the 1980 Winter Olympics in Lake Placid, NY, immediately danced through many a head.
When the media questioned draw emcee Joseph Blatter, then general secretary of a FIFA even less transparent than the one he heads today as president, the shifty Swiss was characteristically oblique. The U.S. and USSR landing in the same group didn’t happen by sheer chance, he allowed. On occasion, said Blatter, FIFA will honor a host nation’s “request.”
In the end, the behind-the-scenes shenanigans that set up the American-Soviet clash were all for naught. On May 8, the Soviet Union, still smarting from the U.S.-led boycott of the 1980 Moscow Games, announced that it was boycotting the Los Angeles Games. Thirteen other communist bloc nations followed suit, plus Iran and Libya. As for the ’84 soccer tournament, it meant that all three medalists from Moscow ’80–Czechoslovakia (gold medal), East Germany (silver) and USSR (bronze)–would be no-shows. They were replaced by three nations that fell short in Europe’s Olympic qualifiers: Italy, West Germany and Norway.
That summer, the U.S. thumped Costa Rica, 3-0, in its opener at Stanford Stadium, then lost to Italy, 1-0, at the Rose Bowl and missed the quarterfinals with a 1-1 tie with Egypt back at Stanford. It appeared to be a golden chance lost, because for this tournament FIFA had changed the rules to allow players, regardless of amateur/professional status, to take part if they hadn’t played in a World Cup for a European or South American country. Thus, this American team was loaded with NASL players, not raw amateurs. And the absence of a marquee match like U.S.-USSR allowed ABC, the Olympic broadcaster, to choose to limit its coverage of the 16-nation, 32-game tournament to all of five minutes.
The ’84 Olympic soccer tournament drew a record 1.4 spectators to lead all sports–track and field included–and enable the Los Angeles Olympic Organizing Committee to turn a $40 million surplus. And that turnout prompted FIFA, four years later, to award the 1994 World Cup to the United States.
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: 2011 FIFA Club World Cup, CONCACAF Champions Cup, CONCACAF Champions League final, Copa Libertadores, Costa Rica, David Beckham, DC United, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Intercontinental Cup, ISL, Javier Morales, Kyle Beckermann, Los Angeles Galaxy, Monterrey, Olimpia, Real Madrid, Real Salt Lake, Rio Tinto Stadium, Surinam, Thierry Henry, Toluca, Trinidad & Tobago
Real Salt Lake scrambled to earn a 2-2 draw with host Monterrey in the first leg of the CONCACAF Champions League final, setting up a climactic second-leg showdown April 27 at Sandy, Utah. The winner advances to the 2011 FIFA Club World Cup in December in Japan.
Argentine midfielder Javier Morales scored the equalizer in the 89th minute to lift the overall record of MLS clubs in Mexico to 0-21-4. Real Salt Lake heads into the deciding leg having gone unbeaten in 37 matches in all competitions at Rio Tinto Stadium. However, it will be without playmaker and captain Kyle Beckermann, an occasional U.S. international who will serve a yellow-card suspension. [April 20]
Comment: Major League Soccer has an international reputation of being on a par with, say, the Belgian second division and, an aging David Beckham or Thierry Henry aside, that’s not likely to change any time soon.* Rapid expansion in recent years hasn’t helped as the native talent pool has been repeatedly dilluted, but Real Salt Lake could deliver a minor blow to that perception when it meets Monterrey needing nothing more than a 1-1 draw to become only the third U.S. club in the competition’s 49-year history to finish first.
Geophysicists rule out the major continental shift necessary for MLS clubs to compete in the UEFA Champions League, so the only way MLS can lift its image is by winning the CONCACAF Champions League on a regular basis, beginning with Real Salt Lake next week. Since the North/Central America/Caribbean region began playing a club championship in 1962, better-paid, better-organized, better-supported Mexican teams have won 26 times (Club America and Cruz Azul five apiece), and no other country is even close. Costa Rica has nearly half as many winners, six, as Mexico has runners-up, 13. After El Salvador’s three winners, the U.S. is tied with Guatemala, Honduras, Trinidad & Tobago, Haiti and Surinam.
What makes this showdown significant for MLS is not just a CONCACAF Champions League trophy at stake but a berth in the FIFA Club World Cup. Back in 1998, when DC United defeated Toluca of Mexico to capture what was then called the CONCACAF Champions Cup, the first-ever FIFA Club World Cup was two years away. In 2000, the Los Angeles Galaxy beat Olimpia of Honduras in the CONCACAF final and thought it had booked a place in the following year’s Club World Cup in Spain, only for that competition to be cancelled for a number of reasons, chief among them the collapse of FIFA’s marking arm, ISL. (As some may recall, the Galaxy was grouped with Real Madrid and scheduled to play the reigning European champion in the first round at the Bernabeu.)
The FIFA Club World Cup, which officially replaced the Intercontinental Cup–the long-running meeting of European and South American club champs–in 2005, certainly is not the most gripping competition on the international soccer calendar. To some Euro champs, it’s been an annoying obligation in the heart of the regular league season, one in which winning is expected. To South American champs, it’s a chance to prove that the Copa Libertadores holder is the world’s best. But for the rest–the continental champions of Africa, Asia, Oceania and, yes, CONCACAF–the Club World Cup presents a priceless opportunity to show their wares to an Eurocentric soccer world.
*According to the most recent rankings of national leagues by the International Federation of Football History and Statistics, Major League Soccer comes in at No. 42. Spain tops the list, followed by England, then Italy, Brazil, Germany, France and Argentina, as well as No. 11 Belgium, No. 12 Mexico, No. 18 Paraguay, No. 27 Japan and No. 32 Israel. Immediately ahead of MLS are Croatia, Moldova, Serbia, Georgia and Tunisia. Immediately after are Saudi Arabia, Bolivia, Poland and Sweden. Five notches below America’s league is the Sudan. Obviously, MLS Commissioner Don Garber continues to have some work ahead of him.
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: 2014 World Cup, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Caribbean, Chuck Blazer. Ghana, CONCACAF, Costa Rica, FIFA Executive Committee, Honduras, Jack Warner, Jamaica, Mexico, New Zealand, Oceania, Trinidad & Tobago, U.S., Uruguay
CONCACAF fell short in its effort to gain an extra berth in the 2014 World Cup as the FIFA Executive Committee decided to give the North/Central America and Caribbean region the same 3.5 spots it was awarded for the 2010 tournament.
Under the allotment, CONCACAF will have three guaranteed spots; the fourth-place finisher in its qualifying competition will have a chance to reach Brasil ’14 through a home-and-home playoff with a nation from another regional confederation.
South America will have 4.5 qualifying berths, plus Brazil’s automatic spot as host. Europe will keep its 13 berths, and Africa its five. Once again, Asia will have 4.5 and Oceania 0.5.
One change: A draw will be held in July to determine the playoff pairings among the CONCACAF fourth-place finisher, South America’s No. 5, Asia’s No. 5 and the Oceania winner.
The outcome, nevertheless, left CONCACAF officials–among them president Jack Warner of Trinidad & Tobago, who said in January that his region would lobby for an outright fourth berth– disappointed, if not angry. Said CONCACAF Secretary General Chuck Blazer of the U.S., like Warner a FIFA Executive Committee member, “We are 35 members who are very serious about qualifying. We want to be treated fairly and given enough opportunity to be successful. Hear us.” [March 3]
Comment: Crocodile tears.
Much can be said about how berths have been doled out since the World Cup expanded from 24 teams to 32 for Francia ’98. Did Asia, in 2002, deserve two qualifying berths to go along with automatic berths that went to co-hosts Japan and South Korea? Should Europe, with a high of 15 nations in ’98, continue to watch its presence erode? When it comes to Africa, which had six total slots at South Africa ’10 and saw only Ghana survive the second round, will FIFA continue to reward that continent based on, presumably, promise alone?
For now, FIFA uncharacteristically got it right, for the most part. Oceania, which since Australia’s defection to Asia has become New Zealand and the Eight Dwarves, truly does not deserve a straight path to a World Cup. South America, with Brazil holding one spot, deserves its five qualifying spots. And CONCACAF, which to most of FIFA is Mexico and the U.S.–plus, depending on the year, Costa Rica or Honduras or Canada or T&T or Jamaica, plus a couple dozen dots in the Caribbean–deserves its 3.5.
At the last World Cup, the U.S., though first in its group at 1-0-2, and Mexico (second, 1-1-1) and Honduras (0-2-1) failed to turn the tournament on its ear. CONCACAF’s fourth-place team, Costa Rica, dropped its playoff with Uruguay, although it should be noted that the Uruguayans went on to reach the semifinals.
If CONCACAF wants its fourth, it will have to overwhelm FIFA with its performance in Brazil. The USA’s appearance in the 2002 quarterfinals won’t do, nor will Mexico’s in 1986, when it was host. It will take that combined, plus a repeat of Uruguay1930, to do it. That time, the U.S., 32 years before the founding of CONCACAF, finished third.