In 1990 my parents were in West Germany when the Germans played Argentina in the World Cup final. My dad was born and raised in Germany during much more tragic times. It was a profound moment for him to be there, raising a glass with his former countrymen to celebrate the ultimate soccer triumph.
In 1994 I lived in Washington D.C. and planned to spend most of the summer studying for the New York state bar exam. Instead, I signed up for a bar review course and proceeded to watch 61 of the 64 World Cup matches played that year. The United States was the host and upset Colombia before losing to Brazil. June 1994 was also when the O.J. chase happened, not to mention Knicks and Rangers both making the finals (I attended Game 4) and a host of other memorable events. But it was the World Cup that capitvated me, that siphoned off my study time.
Thankfully, the Cup ended approximately ten days before the bar exam, plenty of time for me to cram a lot of useless information into my head and pass the bar. But I could more likely tell you the starting eleven for Brazil that year than I could remember anything from my New York State Criminal Procedure study guide.
In 1998 The United States regressed badly, fielding a poorly conceived squad and bowing out in the first round. France went on to win this tournament. Once again I watched most of the games, though not quite as avidly as 1994. Work got in the way, for one thing, as did a social life. I vividly remember sitting in a beach cottage in Montauk with my friends Rob and Harry, squinting at a tiny black and white television as I watched Zinedine Zidane score on two headers to lead France's upset of Brazil. Zidane was a god, capable of taking on the Brazilian legend and emerging victorious. I didn't like France but I was in awe of Zidane.
Even then I wondered why most of my friends couldn't care less about a tournament that captivated the rest of the world. The Olympics on crack. Patriotism in 32 different flavors, the intensity and delayed gratification one feels during those 90 minutes of running time. Why the rest of the world got it but Americans did not: A microcosm of our culture and how it influences and yet stands apart from the rest of the world.
To love soccer is to love the passage of time, to not be in a rush, to celebrate the moment, even when it's a tie and even when the score is 0-0. I don't want to imply the rest of the world is a sort of languid paradise of living in the now, but it often feels like they're dialed to another channel. It's reflected in their social welfare - government provided health care and education in place of personal wealth; shorter work hours; longer summer vacations. And I can't help but feel that soccer - the love of soccer - is a manifestation of that bonhomie.
In 2002 I was at Jim Brady's Pub at 5 AM every morning of the first two weeks of the tournament, downing an "Irish breakfast" while watching the live feed from Korea. I set the alarm for 2:30 AM to watch USA-Portugal live, and was rewarded for my dedication. I watched South Korea upset Italy with hundreds of new friends in an Argentine bistro in Soho.
Halfway through the tournament Ora and I flew to Ecudaor (and Peru) for a month-long trek. Ecuador made the second round of the World Cup that year. We watched with Ecuadorans and cheered on the red, yellow and blue in Quito and Cuenca. I watched the USA-Germany quarterfinal in a hostel in Baños. This was watching soccer at its finest, the game smoothing over the language gap as I hoisted cervezas with the locals. Germany committed a hand ball that never got called, Oliver Kahn made a Matrix-like save on Landon Donovan, and the soccer world order remained undisturbed.
By the time we reached the final we were on a sailboat cruising around Galapagos for a week. Two of our shipmates were Germans from Stuttgart. They invited us to stay with them for the 2006 Cup. Nobody knew how we were going to watch the final while sailing around the most remote of locales. Fear not; another boat delivered us a videotape of the Brazil-Germany match. I watched with the crew and the one other soccerhead among the 15 passengers. Once we had watched every last second of Brazil's victory we broke out the box wine and guitars and kept the sea lions up until sunrise.
In 2006 I was a father with the second kid on the way. I snuck out of work as often as possible to watch the games. I watched at night. My family rented a beach house for the first time. We saved on suntan lotion by staying home to watch the games, once again on a tiny rabbit eared television. What is it with beach houses and tv's? I roared when Clint Dempsey equalized against Ghana, a short lived euphoria to be sure.
We returned to Brooklyn, and Archie got stitches on his forehead while running in Prospect Park on the same day that Germany and Portugal played for third place. We got in and out of the emergency room in time to watch the game, only to have our cable box crash just before opening kickoff. I sped to the Cablevision outpost in the bowels of Brooklyn - and I have the ticket for running a red light to prove it - and stood in line for the entire first half while waiting to get a new cable box. Thankfully the outpost had the game on, on a much nicer TV than our 1995 Sony Trinitron (still in use today).
The final was an ugly affair - valiant play from both teams marred by a very different kind of Zidane header, France losing on penalty kicks, Italy whining and complaining as always but also the better team that day, probably the two soccer powers I least enjoy watching battling it out for the Cup. I loved every minute.
Now it is 2010 and I enjoy the World Cup just as much as when I first totally committed, back in 1994. How often do we Americans get a tangible reminder that we are citizens of the world? How often does a 2 million person country like Slovenia get to line up on an even pitch against the US of A? I'll be rooting hard for our guys tomorrow, but I'll raise a glass to our opponents as well.
Maybe Americans aren't accustomed to struggling on equal footing with lesser nations. Maybe they prefer having the deck stacked in their favor. Maybe soccer is too subtle or slow for our Get It Now culture. The feeling persists, though, that in soccer and in life the rest of the world gets something that we're missing. To borrow from Franklin Foer, soccer might not explain the world as much as it reflects it.
June 17, 2010
June 15, 2010
Shooting Down Some Myths
I strongly support gun control regulation. Arguments that guns don't kill people (people kill people) ring hollow to me. Countries like Japan, England, Switzerland et al., where not even the police carry firearms, have much lower homicide rates. The United States is a violent country and guns play a big role in raising the danger level for everyone.
I was especially dismayed last year when Obama attended a town hall meeting in New Hampshire and some idiot stood outside, fully armed; his idea of a political statement. Political protest shrouded in a selfish, irresponsible, violent fetish, which is what gun ownership is really all about.
I couldn't believe that I had friends who came to the defense of the gun-toting yahoo. Why would anybody devote their energies to making sure more guns stay out on the street and in people's homes, free of those nasty laws and silly concerns over its impact on society?
I'm sure there are many responsible gun owners out there. There are also very ethical investment bankers too. No seriously, there are...somewhere...it doesn't mean we let the damage guns do go unregulated.
I wonder if Charlton Heston really was holding a gun in his hands when he died?
On Sunday the Washington Post ran a great column debunking some myths about gun regulation. It's worth digesting for the next time you hear someone defend their Second Amendment rights.
Bang!
I was especially dismayed last year when Obama attended a town hall meeting in New Hampshire and some idiot stood outside, fully armed; his idea of a political statement. Political protest shrouded in a selfish, irresponsible, violent fetish, which is what gun ownership is really all about.
I couldn't believe that I had friends who came to the defense of the gun-toting yahoo. Why would anybody devote their energies to making sure more guns stay out on the street and in people's homes, free of those nasty laws and silly concerns over its impact on society?
I'm sure there are many responsible gun owners out there. There are also very ethical investment bankers too. No seriously, there are...somewhere...it doesn't mean we let the damage guns do go unregulated.
I wonder if Charlton Heston really was holding a gun in his hands when he died?
On Sunday the Washington Post ran a great column debunking some myths about gun regulation. It's worth digesting for the next time you hear someone defend their Second Amendment rights.
Bang!
June 03, 2010
Purple and Gold and Green and White and Black and Blue
Quick post in anticipation of the NBA Finals:
Boston-LA used to be a magical concept for every hoophead. East versus West, Bird versus Magic, Old School versus Showtime. Every time the Celtics and Lakers played in the 1980's it was an instant classic. Then Magic and Bird left the stage, the Celtics suffered through some lean years, and then Shaq and Kobe started their own dynasty but their foils were the Trail Blazers, Kings, Pacers and Nets. The Celtics were mismanaged and struck by multiple tragedies. It was no contest, until starting in 2007 when Danny Ainge pinched Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen, made some shrewd draft-day moves to get Rajon Rondo and Glenn Davis, kept faith in Kendrick Perkins and Doc Rivers, and eventually put together a TEAM that won the 2008 title, beating the Lakers in six games.
That Lakers team was built to win in its own right, having fleeced Pau Gasol from Memphis in mid-season. But without Andrew Bynum in the finals, the Lakers were unable to withstand the Celtics' rebounding and defense, squandering a huge lead in Game 3 (or was it Game 2?) that sunk their mojo past the point of no return. But the Lakers came right back last year and took the crown, and though they didn't exactly mow down the league like the 1983 Sixers (fo, fi and fo, to quote Moses Malone), their supremacy was never truly in doubt.
And now we are treated to a true grudge match. These teams are laying claim not just to the 2010 NBA Championship, but to a heightened legacy as multiple title winners. Kobe Bryant is going after his fifth ring and second without Shaq. Already one of the 20 greatest players of all time, he's trying to get even higher up the list.
The Celtics know they have less than a quarter tank of gas left. They thought they were going to be one and done in 2008. Six weeks ago they looked like a guaranteed second round exit against either Cleveland or Orlando; now they have knocked out both those teams and are in position to make history.
I'd say that this Celtics team is the closest thing to a Cinderella championship playoff team that we have in the NBA in a very long time. In almost every season a number one or two seed wins the title. When you think about recent playoff upsets, you think about the 2004 Pistons beating the Lakers, the 2006 Miami Heat knocking out the Pistons, or maybe the 2007 Cavaliers beating the Pistons to get to the Finals. You could go back to the 1986 Rockets beating the Lakers or the 1994 Denver Nuggets beating the #1 seeded Seattle Supersonics, and then the Golden State Warriors pulling off an 8 over 1 upset in 2007. But except for the Heat, none of those teams went on to win the title. And that Heat team had Dwyane Wade and Shaq, both top 5 MVP candidates that year, and they played a Dallas Mavericks team that nobody will ever confuse with greatness.
Despite Boston's vast championship history, despite its 2008 title and deep, balanced talent level, if they win this year's finals I think they will go down as the biggest Cinderella in our NBA lifetime, at least since Magic and Bird entered the picture. They will have beaten arguably the three best regular season teams in the league in order to do it. They will win when nobody - not even their number one fan, Bill Simmons - expected them to make a run. I think even most of the guys on the Celtics are pleasantly surprised.
All this depends on the team's health. The Celtics can win because Andrew Bynum is limited, which gives the Celtics an advantage inside IF Perkins, Davis and Wallace are all healthy and available. If Rondo is close to 100 percent, he will abuse Derek Fisher eventually. Garnett can battle Gasol to a draw or even better. Pierce and Artest will surely make headlines at some point but won't win or lose the series. Kobe will be the best player on the floor, period. But if the Celtics are healthy I think they will wear down the Lakers over the course of the series. I think the Lakers bench has taken a step back during the playoffs and cannot match the Celtics bench for defensive intensity and focus.
Back in the day I was a rabid Lakers fan whenever these franchises met. Now the Celtics and Lakers are probably the two teams I am least likely to root for. This matchup is weighty and intense and awesome, but it's not Magical and it doesn't have me flying high like a Bird. I'll appreciate the spectacle but my heart will go to the World Cup. Celtics in 5, pending the health issues on both rosters.
Boston-LA used to be a magical concept for every hoophead. East versus West, Bird versus Magic, Old School versus Showtime. Every time the Celtics and Lakers played in the 1980's it was an instant classic. Then Magic and Bird left the stage, the Celtics suffered through some lean years, and then Shaq and Kobe started their own dynasty but their foils were the Trail Blazers, Kings, Pacers and Nets. The Celtics were mismanaged and struck by multiple tragedies. It was no contest, until starting in 2007 when Danny Ainge pinched Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen, made some shrewd draft-day moves to get Rajon Rondo and Glenn Davis, kept faith in Kendrick Perkins and Doc Rivers, and eventually put together a TEAM that won the 2008 title, beating the Lakers in six games.
That Lakers team was built to win in its own right, having fleeced Pau Gasol from Memphis in mid-season. But without Andrew Bynum in the finals, the Lakers were unable to withstand the Celtics' rebounding and defense, squandering a huge lead in Game 3 (or was it Game 2?) that sunk their mojo past the point of no return. But the Lakers came right back last year and took the crown, and though they didn't exactly mow down the league like the 1983 Sixers (fo, fi and fo, to quote Moses Malone), their supremacy was never truly in doubt.
And now we are treated to a true grudge match. These teams are laying claim not just to the 2010 NBA Championship, but to a heightened legacy as multiple title winners. Kobe Bryant is going after his fifth ring and second without Shaq. Already one of the 20 greatest players of all time, he's trying to get even higher up the list.
The Celtics know they have less than a quarter tank of gas left. They thought they were going to be one and done in 2008. Six weeks ago they looked like a guaranteed second round exit against either Cleveland or Orlando; now they have knocked out both those teams and are in position to make history.
I'd say that this Celtics team is the closest thing to a Cinderella championship playoff team that we have in the NBA in a very long time. In almost every season a number one or two seed wins the title. When you think about recent playoff upsets, you think about the 2004 Pistons beating the Lakers, the 2006 Miami Heat knocking out the Pistons, or maybe the 2007 Cavaliers beating the Pistons to get to the Finals. You could go back to the 1986 Rockets beating the Lakers or the 1994 Denver Nuggets beating the #1 seeded Seattle Supersonics, and then the Golden State Warriors pulling off an 8 over 1 upset in 2007. But except for the Heat, none of those teams went on to win the title. And that Heat team had Dwyane Wade and Shaq, both top 5 MVP candidates that year, and they played a Dallas Mavericks team that nobody will ever confuse with greatness.
Despite Boston's vast championship history, despite its 2008 title and deep, balanced talent level, if they win this year's finals I think they will go down as the biggest Cinderella in our NBA lifetime, at least since Magic and Bird entered the picture. They will have beaten arguably the three best regular season teams in the league in order to do it. They will win when nobody - not even their number one fan, Bill Simmons - expected them to make a run. I think even most of the guys on the Celtics are pleasantly surprised.
All this depends on the team's health. The Celtics can win because Andrew Bynum is limited, which gives the Celtics an advantage inside IF Perkins, Davis and Wallace are all healthy and available. If Rondo is close to 100 percent, he will abuse Derek Fisher eventually. Garnett can battle Gasol to a draw or even better. Pierce and Artest will surely make headlines at some point but won't win or lose the series. Kobe will be the best player on the floor, period. But if the Celtics are healthy I think they will wear down the Lakers over the course of the series. I think the Lakers bench has taken a step back during the playoffs and cannot match the Celtics bench for defensive intensity and focus.
Back in the day I was a rabid Lakers fan whenever these franchises met. Now the Celtics and Lakers are probably the two teams I am least likely to root for. This matchup is weighty and intense and awesome, but it's not Magical and it doesn't have me flying high like a Bird. I'll appreciate the spectacle but my heart will go to the World Cup. Celtics in 5, pending the health issues on both rosters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)