Halldor Orri Bjornsson scored from the spot, Panenka style if you will, taking home the three points with a 2-1 win and they celebrated it in a very special way.  Look at the big fish they caught.

New Jersey finally pushed the CBA rule makers to their limits. By signing a contract that is almost guaranteed to not be completed the NHL did the right thing to step in and say no.

Of course that made people ask the simple question:

Why now?

The answer to this is probably that Kovalchuk’s contract is well over the 40 mark, a point where very few players continue to play (especially snipers who typically retire early: Bure, Naslund, Sundin).

Also, the NHL is aware Kovalchuk wanted $10M/year. If he plays 10-11 years and then retires, he’ll have that.

A Better Way?

Of course there is a much easier way of dealing with these contracts. That is to institute a “maximum salary cap hit” for long term SPC. Any contract year’s cap over 4 years would be subject to these maximums (that is to say a 36 year old signing a 4 year contract would not be impacted at all, but a 5 year contract would, but would only apply to the last year). Say $4M for players over 35, $2M for players over 37 and $1M for players over 39.

However the sum of the contract would still be the same, so the difference would be applied to the years there there is no maximum:

I’m sure others could see how it would affect players like Luongo and Hossa. But at least it would create a consistent system as opposed to this ad-hoc system full of surprises. All of the sudden these long terms contracts are worthless!

What will the NHL accept?

Obviously the Devils will go back the drawing board, however, I’m not sure how much cap space they can give up. I’m sure N.J and the NHL will take a lot about this over the next few days and a slightly modified contract will be approved (and this whole process will turn out to be a joke).

As much as I love a World Cup its climax means only one thing: the football season is almost here. No matter how exciting or controversial the internationals can be there is nothing like the domestic season in terms of thrills, spills and magic.

Pre-season friendlies are already underway and fans are beginning to get glimpses of their new supposed star or that cheap option donkey your club just signed to fill the vacant left back slot.

This time of year truly is the “silly season” of the football calendar. Even more so because it is a World Cup summer. While transfer fees have rocketed over the last decade due to the true commercial power of the sport the post-WC month often provides us with a few shock moves where previously unheard of journeymen earn a lucrative move to a European powerhouse.

Some are great pieces of business. Others, well, just aren’t. There are plenty of examples of both littered through the annuls of football history and we outline some of those who’ve flopped with the added pressure of a huge price tag above their head.

Spain’s two David’s; Silva and Villa, have already earned their big-money moves to Manchester City and Barcelona respectively based on their domestic performances but the likes of Diego Forlan and Wesley Sneijder are being linked with expensive moves to England after showing they still have it. Perhaps these are bad examples due to television coverage allowing us to watch their exploits in Spain and Italy closely anyway. But such is globalisation.

El-Hadji Diouf and Salif Diao – Senegal – Japan and Korea 2002

When the 2002 World Cup kicked off few had heard of some of Senegal’s star acts. Then, in the opening match against the holders France, Senegal stifled the expensive French attack and snatched a winner courtesy of man mountain Papa Bouba Diop. Senegal went on to reach the quaterfinals and lone striker El-Hadji Diouf was the real headline maker with his energy, quick feet and bizarre haircuts.

He and engineroom guvner Salif Diao joined Liverpool. Diouf cost over £10m from Lens and was Gerard Houllier’s choice ahead of signing Nicolas Anelka permanently after starring on loan the previous year. Used primarily on the wing, Diouf only scored six goals in his first season, before then becoming the first Liverpool No. 9 ever to go an entire campaign without scoring during the 2003/2004 season.

He was farmed out to Bolton on loan when Rafa Benitez took over after being regarded as a failure and even captain Steven Gerrard suggested this in his autobiography. After then joining them permanently he was more of a success and he now plies his trade for Blackburn Rovers.

Diao had cost Liverpool £5m from Sedan in France but was often played out of position by Houllier at centre half. People also accused him of being out of his depth at such a big club. When Benitez took over Diao reverted to centre-mid but some poor displays saw him lose his place to Xabi Alonso. He also suffered horrendous injury problems which hampered a loan move to Portsmouth and he joined Stoke City in 2006 where he remains today.

Stephane Guivarc’h – France – France 1998

Playing as the lone striker in France’s 1998 World Cup win on home soil Guivarc’h failed to contribute a single goal, despite some excellent club form the season before. This was exactly the kind of striker Kenny Dalglish decided Newcastle United needed and snapped him up from Auxerre where in his one season with the club he had scored 21 goals in 32 games.

He only played four games, scoring on his debut against Liverpool. Then the Newcastle management merry-go-round kicked in to full effect once more and Ruud Gullit was in the hotseat.

He decided he didn’t like Guivarc’h and the striker was sold to Glasgow Rangers where he managed four strikes in 15 games. He returned to Auxerre where his goalscoring exploits returned.

In October 2009 the Daily Mail ranked Guivarc’h as No. 1 in a list of the “50 worst strikers to grace the Premier League.” He responded by saying it was a “truly crap newspaper.” Good point!

 Lukas Podolski – Germany – Germany 2006

After starring for his country in their home tournament during the summer of 2006 Polish-born Lukas Podolski earned a big €10m move from Koln to Bayern Munich.

Although starting fairly well the German giants then added giant Italian forward Luca Toni to their arsenal at a time when the club was signing any striker available as they believed a 5-0-5 formation was best for winning league titles.

As a result, Podolski slipped down the pecking order and was often forced to play wide left as Bayern preferred to use Toni alongside fellow German star Miroslav Klose.

In October of that year Podolski suffered a serious injury to his right ankle after a challenge from teammate Mark van Bommel in training and this was the beginning of the decline for the man.

However he did continue to perform at international level and this resulted in a move back to Koln in 2009 for another €10m fee after scoring 15 goals in 72 appearances for Bayern.

Oleg Salenko – Russia – USA 1994

Salenko shared the Golden Boot with Bulgaria’s Hristo Stoichkov after notching six goals at the World Cup, five coming in one game against Cameroon.

After previously impressing for Dynamo Kiev he earned a big-money move to Valencia in Spain where a largely unimpressive season (seven goals in 25 games) saw the stint last one solitary season.

Injuries and problems with weight and fitness saw the once coveted striker become something of a journeyman including a similarly short stint at Glasgow Rangers (although here he managed a 1-in-2 ratio of seven goals in 14 games).

It was these problems with weight which ended his career in 2000.

Daniel Amokachi – Nigeria – USA 1994

Having impressed for Belgian side Club Brugge from 1990-94, the pacey Nigerian forward had an impressive tournament in the US which earned him a (by today’s standards) relatively cheap move to Everton in England for £3m.

Over the next two years Amokachi did a hell of a lot of running with little end product but he did win the F.A. Cup in 1995 after a brief cameo appearance in the final. But it was the semifinal where he made his name. He infuriated manager Joe Royle by bringing HIMSELF on as a substitute. However it worked, he scored twice and Everton reached Wembley.

He left Everton in 1996 having spent most of his time as understudy to Paul Rideout and Duncan Ferguson who had been Everton’s established strikeforce at the time. He did, however, deputise for Ferguson while he served six-week prison stint during that period.

He was sold to Besiktas in Turkey where his goalscoring record was equally as unimpressive.

So it looks like mainly strikers being the culprits then. Yes there are plenty of success stories too but they’re not nearly as entertaining as the other side of the coin.

Who has been your big money World Cup flops over the years? Now we can sit back and wait to see if anybody from 2010 is added to this list. Luis Suarez? Asamoah Gyan?

Let the “silly season” begin.

Speaking to a tennis-mad relative this week we were discussing last weekend’s inductions at the International Tennis Hall of Fame in Newport, RI, and how fans were staying away because the players on show weren’t considered ‘A-list’ as they were doubles specialists.

This got me thinking a lot this week as to the difference between those perceived as singles and doubles specialists and what they could be had they been able to conquer both fields.

Looking at those inducted last week, we had the Australian ‘Woodies’ Mark Woodforde and Todd Woodbridge. Together they held aloft a record 61 ATP doubles titles, a record only just equalled by the Bryan brothers of America, including 11 majors.

They are the only team in the Open Era to win one of the four Slams for six consecutive years and sit second in the all time Grand Slam doubles winners list to the twelve hoisted by John Newcombe and Tony Roche.

Gigi Fernandez and Natasha Zvereva won more women’s doubles titles and Grand Slams together than any other partnership since Martina Navratilova and Pam Shriver. They won six consecutive Slams from the 1992 French Open to the 1993 Wimbledon title and are largely considered one of the sport’s best partnerships.

These sound pretty ‘A-List’ to me. So why are doubles players not remembered as fondly as some of their singles specialist counterparts?

For years Anna Kournikova was chastised as being more eye candy than tennis quality. Yet she won two Grand Slam doubles titles with Martina Hingis and was ranked as the No. 1 doubles player in the world. She was also named (w. Hingis) as the No. 1 WTA doubles partnership of 1999.

How big could the worldwide names of Leander Paes or Liezel Huber have been had they single-handedly conquered the tennis courts? And why does this happen?

The Williams sisters have pretty much dominated the women’s game over the past few years by sweeping aside nearly everything before them in both singles and doubles play. Serena has her clothing labels, they have both ventured in to writing, while top magazine covers have also borne their images. They both appeared in cult American TV hit ‘The Simpsons’ alongside Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi, widely seen as one of the greatest monikers of success in some fields.

Going back to the record-equalling Bryan bros. it begs the question of how large an empire they could muster had they also been top singles players too. Men’s tennis is generally the larger of the two, and players like Roger Federer and Agassi before him became worldwide figures with both tennis fans and non-sports fanatics by facing advertising campaigns for some of the world’s largest international corporations.

I have no doubt that they would garner the same attention. And with their band, and the various spin offs other top spars enjoy they could quite easily amass a financial empire to match some of the world’s top stars.

Not that they will be unhappy with what they have achieved of course. Let me say that this post is not meant to demeanour the doubles game in any way as the top players in this field are often equally as athletic as their singles counterparts but this facet of the game always plays second-fiddle to its glamorous brother and looks set to always do so.

Woodforde said at the ITHF induction ceremony that they never intended their careers to turn out this way and that they just turned out to be better doubles players. Congratulations to them all. But what could have become of them had the ball bounced the other way?

What I did, simplistically, was take the top soccer nations in history according to ELO rankings -  Brazil, Italy, Germany, Argentina, Holland, France, England, Spain and Uruguay. I took their all-times records and matched them against their records against “non-ranked” teams of a particular decade at the World Cup. For example, ELO ranks the top 20 sides per decade. If a team is in the list, they’re not considered to be non-ranked or “small.” So if, say, Germany lost to Mexico in the 1950s and Mexico wasn’t ranked, then that loss was tabulated as Germany losing to a small team.

I did this for every record matching it to the ELO rankings per decade. It’s not perfect, but so aren’t you. Fifa doesn’t do it and all we’re left with is ELO.

Notes: Another thing I took the liberty of doing is counting a shoot-out as a win or loss and not a draw. For me, it’s a true reflection. After all, if we can determine a champion by it then it’s good enough to be a win. Simple. Also, 2010 was not considered because the 2010s are just starting. If I time at a later date, I’ll refine this list.

Ok. Here we go:

Top teams against non-ranked teams by winning percentage:

1) Brazil – 92 WC games – 25 against non-ranked games: 23-0-2: .920

2) Holland – 36 – 13 anrt;  9-2-2: .870

3) Germany – 92 – 34 anrt; 25-6-3: .823

4) Argentina – 65 – 24 anrt; 19-1-4: .813

5) Spain 49- 22 anrt; 16-3-3: .795

6) France 51 – 17 anrt; 12-3-2: .794

7) Italy 77 – 31 anrt; 20-7-4; .758

England 55 – 18 anrt 11-5-2: .750

9) Uruguay 35 – 17 anrt 6-5-6: .500

For fun I decided to do the opposite and see how these teams did against RANKED sides:

1) Brazil .724

2) Germany .647

3) Italy .641

4) Argentina .512

5) England .500

6) Uruguay .500

7) France .485

Holland .478

9) Spain .370

So much to digest. No really. I just had a salad with peanut sauce. Dee-lish. About the stats.

Brazil and Germany are indeed consistent but maybe there’s some truth to Italy – relative to my simple criteria  sample anyway – being better against quality sides. In the first part, though their winning percentage is high, it’s only good for 7th spot ahead of England and Uruguay. But where the competition stiffens, they rise to 3rd in the second list. So far the Big Four (Brazil, Germany, Italy, Argentina) are ‘acting” like the Big four.

Now consider the drop (against non-ranked teams to ranked teams) in total points between bagel bites:

1) Spain 425

2) Holland 392

3) France 309

4) Argentina 301 

5) England 250

6) Brazil 196

7) Germany 176

Italy 117

9) Uruguay —  (no change)

It’s right after death that it feels like a person is most alive.

This is especially true of great and famous men and women. We are surrounded by the recently departed, by their photos, their videos, their actions and their words as we try so drastically to try to create their essence just as the real thing is no longer available.

In this world, the true magnitude of a passing doesn’t hit until much later on, at some point in time in which we would normally consider a said person in a situation, only to find that he or she is no longer there.

Such is the case with George Steinbrenner.

Most likely, if you are reading this, you are like me–you never met him, or, if you did, it was only for a moment. In his life, he was busy running the Yankees; you and I were busy being fans, applauding and criticizing his decisions as they seemed relevant to the common cause of yet another World Series title.

We live our lives, he lived his, and if not for the vehicle of a baseball team, the probability is that they would have never intersected.

And yet, here we are now, if not necessarily blindsided, than at least stunned by the passing of a man who truly was a lion in his realm. In our remembrances, we bring him to life again.

We remember him, figurative warts and all, because his character so often made an appearance in our pastime, and even for some of us, our jobs. We will remember him not because he was perfect, but because he was human. His goal–that of winning–was human, as was the manner in which he set out to do it, a manner that could sometimes blur the lines between what was acceptable and what was not.

It does seem fitting–after all, ideals don’t play baseball; people do. Yes, people that we hail as near saints, but also people that can err–sometimes quite grievously–but people all the same.

The videos, the obituaries, the tributes will fade with the passage of time.

Yet it is because of his legacy, because of what he did, good and ill, for the baseball team we like to call our own even if we never paid a cent nor swung a bat, that his memory will not just live on, but prosper.

Some cultures pose that no one is truly dead until the last that remembers has gone as well; if this is the case, then Mr. Steinbrenner will live for a little while longer…

Next to Blatter, Uncle Giggles is sane

I’ve just about had it with Fifa President Sepp Blatter. Let’s jump into his latest round of thoughtless commentary shall we?

‘I have to compliment the winners – the Spanish national team, La Roja.”

‘Finally we had a winner playing good football and maybe from a technical point of view there are maybe some questions but it’s the (coach) who decides ‘do we play to win or do we play not lose’ and this will decide on whether we have spectacular or non-spectacular games.’

What a piece of work this guy is.  

“Finally?” Nice under handed shot at the Azzurri. Rather pusillanimous of him no? More on that in a minute.

First, a couple of things.

Although pretty much a ho-hum tournament, a few teams played good football at this world cup. Not only that, on his own website fans selected Uruguay followed by Germany as the best playing sides.  So don’t know why he’s going out of his way to praise Spain.

Second, who decided that a team playing not to lose is wrong? Where is it explicitly stated this is not only illegal but against some spiritual code? If one side attacks and one chooses to sit back, SO BE IT. It’s not his place to determine what tactics teams choose and whether they’re acceptable. There is not right way to play, just different interpretations. Ok, so he likes Spain. Good for him. I don’t care. He should be publicly neutral.

This beauty thing is really making people loopy.  Is beauty not in the eye of the beholder? Had it not occured to Blatter that maybe, just maybe, some people don’t care for a derivative Spanish style of play?

Back to the Azzurri. In 2006 he, without shame, shunned Italy by not presenting the trophy to them later offering a meek excuse in an apology.

I don’t understand what he’s driving at with his fawning over Spain. Because they “play with the right intentions even though it didn’t really pan out” is something to admire at the expense of another team?

Besides, what was he watching in 2006?  The Azzurri actually played a balanced style and scored more goals than Spain in 2010. Show me evidence of Italy ”not playing to win” in 2006. Marcello Lippi had a decisively offensive tilt to his thinking then. And it’s not like you can single them out for “lack of fair play” since 2010 showed once and for all they are far from alone on this front. Above all, they didn’t lose a single game. By contrast Spain lost a game and were fortunate to have escaped the game against Paraguay. Calling a spade a spade folks.

I single out Italy and attach it to his comment because I doubt he’d say anything negative about Brazil who won in 2002 (after all, they are the “heartbeat” of football) and definitely not France in 1998 and again Brazil in 1994. Now we’re at Germany in 1990 and I doubt he meant them either. England? Come on lads, they’re the “motherland!”

So that leaves Italy. A soccer nation, franky, that has given so much more than Spain in the annals of soccer history. A soccer team so stigmatized people have loss sense of soccer perspective. A position that is persistently hammered out in the (mostly British) press and now Blatter who joins that alliance.

This guy should come out and say he’s anti-Azzurri once and for all and stop with the twirpy public comments. A president of an entire soccer organization should not be saying such things.

There were also some shots at Holland.

‘The final was not exactly what I expected in terms of fair play. It’s not up to me judge the performances of the officials, I can only say it was a very hard task that the referee trio had on the field of play.”

That first line was for you Holland.

“Blatter was asked whether Webb should have shown a red card to Mark van Bommel
and Nigel de Jong, and replied: “In football we have to live with the errors of players, and of referees. I don’t think perfection exists in this world.”

This is, of course, the pro-Spain press overlooking the fact that Andres Iniesta escaped being sent off for his near Zidane moment. Apparently, that didn’t merit a question to be posed.

Spain is being painted as the innocents here. Why, I’m not sure I guess it’s true if you please the masses by merely giving them what they perceive to be “beautiful” soccer then the poor fair play displayed by such a team will be overlooked.

Maybe Holland were rough, but Spain reacted with a lack of “spirit” themselves by flopping all over the place. Two wrongs don’t make a right after all, right?

Holland tried to throw Spain off their game. Big deal.  Anyone ever read Sun Tzu? It’s a classic military strategy.

Maybe Blatter doesn’t like Italian-style soccer (even though Spain played essentially defensive soccer scoring eight goals in seven games; five by way of ONE player) or took exception to Holland’s tactics, but that’s not his bloody place to insinuate this.

Millions of people enjoy Italian soccer (including myself) and it’s time Blatter stops taking backhanded shots at their fans.  

The ultimate irony is that his own sense of fair play is distorted and dishonest. The sooner he resigns the better if you ask me.

So another World Cup has drawn to a close with Spain’s last gasp win against Holland etching a new name on to the famous Jules Rimet trophy.

It has been a month of spills and thrills with many players the world over hitting the headlines for varying reasons. From supposed North Korean defections, to goalkeepers blaming their girlfriends for putting them off at key moments, to tears during both national anthems and post-match analysis, this will go down as one to remember.

 Here we take a look at the top moments of the tournament. Do you agree with the selections? And, if not, what would you have picked?

 Player of the Tournament: Diego Forlan

David Villa’s goalscoring heroics could have won him this accolade along with the entire German midfield but, for me, Forlan gets the nod.

He scored spectacular goals, led the line like a true pro and was happy lo let other players such as Luis Suarez or Edinson Cavani take the limelight when he wasn’t scoring.

The clincher for this award was his one-man demolition of South Africa in the group stages. In 90 minutes he misplaced two passes, ran in to trouble once, scored a sublime dipping drive from range and picked out one of the passes of the tournament with his cross-field pearler for Luis Suarez to then cross for the third goal.

He also won the official tournament Golden Ball as top player.

Rough Diamond of the Tournament: Thomas Mueller

Just pipping his midfield counterpart Mesut Ozil is Germany’s Thomas Mueller as the brightest prospect we hadn’t heard much about beforehand.

Having only made his Bayern Munich debut last season he went on to star for his country in their run to the World Cup semifinal and played instrumental roles in their demolition of arch enemies England and pre-tournament favourites Argentina.

Direct, quick and with a nifty eye for goal Mueller bridges the gap from midfield to attack brilliantly and possesses a deadly cross which the likes of Miroslav Klose and Lukas Podolski relished being on the other end of. His three assists added to his five tournament strikes helped also land him the Golden Boot top scorer award, as well as the young player of the tournament award.

 Team of the Tournament: Germany

While many will argue for Spain as the tournament winners for me it was the performances of the Germans that really caught the eye.

Written off by everyone, including their former stars, before the kick off they scored four goals in thee separate matches and played with the freedom of youth, and lack of fear that Italy and France could have done with.

With the wise old head of Miroslav Klose leading a midfield of young whippersnappers in to battle they put the unexpected suicide of goalie Robert Enke and injury to influential captain Michael Ballack behind them and let the football do the talking.

The best bit is we’ll be watching this side for a good decade yet!

 Goal of the Tournament: David Villa v Honduras

Take your pick. Any of Diego Forlan’s five strikes could win it. How about Gio van Bronckhorst’s long range effort against Uruguay? There’s also Ozil’s chipped effort against Ghana and the delightful lob from Italy’s Fabio Quagliarella against Slovakia.

But for me it was the solo run and curling finish from Spain’s main man against the plucky Hondurans in the group stages. Picking up the ball outside the box near the left touchline he left two Honduran defenders in his wake and with a quick shuffle of feet dispatched an unstoppable drive around ‘keeper Noel Valladares.

 Save of the Tournament: Iker Casillas v Arjen Robben, World Cup Final

There may have been aesthetically or technically better saves throughout the tournament but in terms of sheer importance this one wins hands down.

As the final roared on in such tense circumstances a disgustingly beautiful ball from Dutch ace Wesley Sneijder sent the Bayern Munich winger through on goal and as he unleashed his shot it appeared that Casillas had gone the wrong way.

Then, the ‘keeper’s right leg rose and deflected the ball round the post to keep the match scoreless. Had that gone in, a different nation would be celebrating this morning.

 Villain of the Tournament: Mark van Bommel

I know the whole of Africa will plump for Luis Suarez after ‘that’ handball. But after continually kicking every opponent that came near him quite how van Bommel didn’t see a red card in this tournament is beyond me.

 My memories of a young van Bommel are ones of neat passes and goals from 30+ yards. He seems to have matured in to an angry menace.

Mark may have made a lot of enemies during the past four weeks so could be having a bit of retribution coming his way over the next season.

 Moment of the Tournament: Siphiwe Tshabalala’s opening goal against Mexico

After all the negative build-up, the predictions of crime and tragedy from the rest of the world, the tournament exploded in to a vuvuzela-led mass of noise as home favourite Tshabalala unleashed an unstoppable drive across Mexican ‘keeper Oscar Perez in to the roof of the net.

The celebration matched the feeling of the crowd as Bafana Bafana danced along the touchline like there was no tomorrow. It was an insight in to the carnival we were about to witness and realisation for the home fans that this whole event was actually happening.

One moment united all four corners of the country and it is such a shame the hosts could not progress through the group stages and extend the home party further.

Spain edged out the Netherlands 1-0 on a goal from Andres Iniesta in the 116th minute in extra time. It was a testy affair with the Dutch coming in with a specific game plan of physical play and tight marking. They succeeded on both counts much to the dismay of Dutch “Total Football” purists. Unfortunately, such a style demands an efficient counter-attack and they simply didn’t capitalize on their chances. Arjen Robben, most notably, in close on Iker Casillas will be one for the bad memories lab.

Holland was contesting their third world cup final and with the loss, they drop to 0-3 in the finals making them the Minnesota Vikings and Buffalo Bills of world soccer. Always the brides maid, never the bride (boo-hoo-woo) I’m afraid for the Oranje.

While the game itself was essentially as exciting as a night at your local elastic manufacturing company by day and strip joint for senior citizens by night, the emotions were pretty high in the first 45 minutes. In the first half, the Dutch took the initiative with the fouls but were unlucky to receive some yellow cards from English referee Webb. Some were indeed well deserved but the Spanish caught on and began flopping to take advantage of the physical play. 

I kept waiting and waiting for a Zidane moment. Iniesta came closest to one when he lashed out at a Dutch player. De Jong too came within inches with his hommage to Bruce Lee with a high kick into the chest of Xabi Alonso.

There were moments of slick play but overall, this was not “beautiful” by any stretch of the imagination.

Can we cut it out with the ” beautiful” crap? Just because you attack for its own sake doesn’t mean you’re “beautiful.” Or at least it wasn’t “beautiful” that’s been associated with Spanish soccer.

Spain showed it can play just as cynical and tough minded as any team. I liked that. The cold, hard fact is in order to win a WC you have to be pragmatic. It’s ONE game and ONE chance and you have to do what you need to to win.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. For instance, Azzurri supporters have always maintained there’s a certain elegance and sophistication to their oft-misunderstood style. Lo and behold, didn’t Spain played a variation of “catenaccio?” I think they did (come to think of it, so did Holland) and did a good job of it.

It didn’t “look” like it because there was no classic sweeper and they don’t play counter attack soccer. But both are predicated on ball possession but in a different vain. Italy isn’t always on the attack choosing to let tactics direct and to even absorb play while Spain prefers more fluidity and constant ball circulation.

Dare not compare Spain to Italy, especially to the British press (who have an unhealthy and unbecoming teenage crush on all things Brazil and now Spain) , but that’s how they did it. People publicly decry it, but use it when it suits their needs. Why? Because it damn works  provided you have the right personel in place.

So Spain’s victory (and Holland’s success) was more rooted in realistic play. They didn’t create enormous amount of spaces and chances; just enough to get a goal and some of them came off errors and broken plays. Five of their goals came from but one player.

In other words, luck factored in. And this is how it is. Good on them. It takes luck to win sometimes. Ask Brazil, Germany, Italy and even Holland how luck factors into the equation.

The truth is, the infamously under achieving Spaniards triumphed over a mediocre field.  Just keeping it real folks because you know pundits will overlook these realities in search of a new team to love, hug and kiss.

Congratulations to Spain. They waited long enough. Now the hyper Spanish press can remove that chip on their shoulders. Spain is doing well in tennis, cycling and soccer now.

***

And can someone explain to me how Spain won the “Fair Play” award? Seriously. If they were “fair play” soccer is in deep trouble.

North Korea was the only team who really played clean. Heck, Suarez aside, of the final four teams, Uruguay was pretty clean all things considered - and that’s saying much for a team who historically can rough things up.

***

Note on Sepp Blatter. As I watched him present the trophy to Spain, I felt bad for Italian fans for their snub by him. It was tactless, classless and shameless. His excuse of not wanting to be booed was weak and laughable. FIFA stinks for two reasons: Technology – or lack thereof and Shlepp Bladder.

When one of the classiest players in history Paolo Maldini wonders about an anti-Italian bias you know something is up. I’m not one for conspiracies but actions speak louder than words on this front and Blatter’s actions speak for themselves.