i know who will win the world cup

many pundits say predicting a world cup is for idiots. i say they’re the idiots. trying to predict a world cup may indeed be silly but aren’t several things we enjoy most in life? for example, i enjoy irritating the great Mufti of the west by predicting he will start drinking again by mid-afternoon local time on July 2nd.

this is the best collection of talent i ever remember seeing at a world cup, on the squads and on the injury report. if the last few years in football have taught us anything it is that anybody can win a tournament in any given year (exhibit one, two, three, four, the uefa cup) as long as they do the obvious.

obvious – to win football games you need to do one single thing, the golden rule if you may: score one more goal than the opposition.

to win a single elimination tournament you need to be consistent with the golden rule, you also need: to do one thing really really well (team identity), a spine, composure, momentum and consistency, health, fearlessness, and luck. all you can do as a team is put yourself in the best position to win and then hope you don’t face Greece – just kidding… not really.

do one thing really really well (team identity): every team will hit a lull at some point or even be outplayed. if a team does one thing really really well then such occurrences become bearable. an overbearing defense can get a lackluster performance from the attack a few extra chances. a destructive attack can allow for a temporarily porous defense. doing one thing really really well will buy you mistakes.

spine: it’s the infrastructure of the team. having a world class defense, midfield or attack on its own is not as critical as having a spine. the spine is the roamer in front of the back four reducing pressure. the spine is the all around distributor whose pinpoint passes make an above average striker seem world class. the spine is the setup, the stop, the break of the opponent’s flow, the towering midfield header, the physical presence, and more… in a player or two.

composure: pressure can take its toll. pressure from previous tournaments can take its toll. composure comes from the top down, from the manager to the players, from the captain to the newbie. the hope of a nation could come down to one simple kick for eternal glory. composure is key.

momentum and consistency: you naturally need it during the tournament but also coming into the tournament. the quality of play has to be present throughout the qualification and friendlies. the team has to play together without too many changes in order to maximize potential.

health: this is a tournament of stamina and health. the winner is looking at 7 strong performances in a month. players might not need to be in mid-season shape but at the very least they need to be healthy. (funny how everything comes down to relativity in single elimination tournaments: you don’t have to be the best of all time but simply the best on that day)

fearlessness: winning a single elimination tournament takes balls, very large ones at times. think of this comeback. think of this goal. think of this one too. this one rules them all. let’s make this easier. think of a save (0:29), then another (1:49), and then another (3:00). think of this free kick.
luck: when the opportunity presents itself you hand the ball, that’s called opportunistic. the referee not seeing it, that’s called luck.

power ranking – here are the teams, grouped by potential to win the world cup based on the criteria above.

thank you for playing – teams glaringly missing several of the components
South Africa – South Korea – Algeria – Slovenia – Japan – New Zealand – Slovakia – Korea DPR – Switzerland – Honduras

teams that could have an impact – they are are missing a few components
Uruguay – Nigeria – Australia – Ghana – Denmark – Paraguay – Chile

teams with an outside chance – they have most of the criteria but will need something real special
Mexico – France – USA – Germany – Serbia – Cameroon – Italy – Cote D’Ivoire – Portugal

favorites – why they will win in three words or less and why they won’t in two or less
Argentina
will – Messi, best attack
won’t – defensive midfield
England
will – defense, composure (Capello)
won’t – health, pressure
Netherlands
will – most creative team
won’t – self-destructive
Brazil
will – best all-around
won’t – umm… stumped
Spain
will – best talent, Xavi
won’t – health, focus

Greece (the category)
Greece (the team)

Group G: Death by Dunga

Brazil. Perennial favourites. The neutral’s choice. The samba nation’s football artistes dancing and dazzling their way to World Cup triumphs that even their opponents could hardly begrudge them considering the joie de vivre with which they played the game. But now, with Dunga in charge, there’s some discontent brewing, even from such Brazilian heroes such as Socrates. The charges are that the team are boring, they play to win, don’t have the artistic side that previous Brazilian teams have had. Dunga responds that he’s being given the job of winning the World Cup, and he aims to do that and the methods employed are his business and his business alone. I have to admire Dunga answering his critics with results from the beginning of his unpopular tenure. I am not sure if he’ll ever be fully accepted by the Brazilian public or former luminaries like Socrates even if he does win the World Cup. And although some criticism of his style of play is justified, I think with the caliber of players he has at his disposal, we will still be seeing some of that old, skillful Brazil. They don’t have the strikers of yore, Luis Fabiano and Robinho probably better described as effective rather than brilliant, but they still have Kaka and I expect Dani Alves and Maicon to make opposition left backs’ lives a living hell. Pastor, I’ll defer to your analysis of this team and continue on to the rest.

The team most likely to challenge Brazil’s preordained dominance of this group is Portugal. There are question marks over coach Carlos Queiroz. As number two to Alex Ferguson at Man Poo, he’s learned his craft under one of the masters of the sport, but his time at Real Madrid and his first stint in charge of Portugal, not to mention Portugal’s stuttering qualification campaign, might be a sign that this team is weaker than the sum of its parts would suggest. After all, I really cannot write about this Portugal team or indeed this World Cup without mentioning Cristiano Ronaldo. The Winking Wonder will play a huge role in this World Cup and he is the unquestioned star of this team, unlike in the past when he had to contend with the likes of Luis Figo. His probable teammate this time time around on the other flank will be former Man Poo cohort Nani (update: Nani has been struck down by the World Cup injury curse and will not be in South Africa), and switching flanks at will, these two will terrorize opposing fullbacks. As an attacking unit, this should function well. The dangers? Ronaldo has a tendency to get frustrated if things don’t go his way, and if he sulks the team may not gel offensively. Defensively, Ricardo Carvalho and Paulo Ferreira are hardly first-choice any more at Chelsea and in midfield, Blues teammate Deco has found himself stranded on the bench just as often. I think they might leak goals but depend on their attacking prowess to get them out of trouble.

Ivory Coast’s World Cup preparations have not been ideal, with their star striker Didier Drogba now a doubt for the group stages with a fractured elbow. They were already dealing with a new coach in Sven-Goran Eriksson. English fans will cringe as they recall his tenure at their national team but Eriksson is undoubtedly a good manager, and coming in on such short notice, I can only think of Guus Hiddink doing a better job. He has plenty of World Cup experience, knows how to manage star players and made it to the quarterfinals twice with England. Detractors will comment on him giving players too much power and the fact that with the England team he had, he should have gone further than he did in tournament play. His, and his team’s, big test will be the first game against Portugal. That will probably be the match that decides the second team to qualify from this group unless Dunga really gets it wrong with Brazil. With Drogba’s injury, the onus for goals falls upon Aruna Dindane and Drogba’s Chelsea teammate Salomon Kalou and I think they will deliver. And with Didier Zokora and Yaya Toure in midfield, Eriksson should definitely be able to at least give Portugal a run for their money in the hunt for second place.

I don’t have too much hope for North Korea. They did well to qualify, and are still reliving the glory of their 1-0 victory over Italy in 1966. Hm, perhaps they do have something in common with England?! I doubt strongly whether they will have a new victory to revel in for the next 44 years despite the promises of striker Jong Tae-Se. If he scores at all, that should be more than enough for North Korea’s sojourn in South Africa. Perhaps they should think about incorporating the Dear Leader into their squad: apparently, he’s really good from long range.

group G: what’s so deadly about this group?

i kept hearing this is the group of death. some thoughts about that: any doubt Brazil is winning this group? i didn’t think so. so the battle is for second in the group and that’s between two teams since the third is a practice squad. what’s deadly about that? groups A, D, and even F are significantly harder to predict.

Brazil
obvious – how obvious can one be? what other team has the luxury of leaving a resurgent Ronaldinho off the team. they are looking ruthless under the Dunga regime. their defense is staunch and their transition game as strong as ever. Maicon is a beast a la Cafu but with a better knack for scoring. Dani Alves can play anywhere along the right flank. Kaka is always dangerous especially when the team revolves around him and him alone.  the strikers are strong but not Brazil strong. the defense and goalkeeping just won Inter the champions league. this team is obviously the main favorite.
pitfalls – their ruthlessness has somewhat taken the samba from their game. i don’t know if its just a stylistic negative rather than an competitive one. i wonder how they might react if pressed to play from behind against one of the favorites. can they turn it on like the brazilian squad we are more accustomed to? i am being nitpicky.
verdict – this is a team that has the making of a world champion. no other team is as convincing.

Portugal
obvious – Mufti, you and i have discussed this earlier: has everybody given up on Portugal? why is it exactly? even though most have criticized this team as being inconsistent they haven’t lost in a while. love him or hate him C. Ronaldo cannot be taken lightly. if he doesn’t create, he draws enough attention to allow others to create.
pitfalls – this team is getting a little old with Deco, Carvalho, Simao, and Fererira over 30. they might not be losing their games but they certainly aren’t playing too convincingly since Queiroz took over. which brings me to my last point: Queiroz is not a good manager.
verdict – this team might have the right mix of experience, youthful zest, and a sense of under-appreciation to actually make a strong run at the world cup.

Ivory Coast
obvious – even injured, Drogba is dangerous. he’s a physical specimen. the elephants have speed and size at most positions. individually it is an extremely talented squad maybe even the most talented of the african squads. their players play with europe’s best clubs and should bring some of that experience with them to the tournament.
pitfalls – they decided to upgrade the manager; that manager is Eriksson. what?!? they seem to go by on their reputation as the best in Africa for a while now. they haven’t been very successful in tournaments.
verdict –  there is a lot of pressure on this team to be the hope of Africa at this world cup. the group they are drawn in and the injury to Drogba won’t help them in their quest.

Korea DPR
verdict – whipping boys!

group F: the mean post

i like how you analyzed the performance of a manpoo player as sub-par although he was injured but you called Gerrard’s performance inspirational. tell me again what part of his performance this past year was inspirational? was it inpirational because the rest of the team was so boring at times. my point is Gerrard’s performance this past season was sub-par, same as Rio’s. let’s not confuse the days of yore with yesterday, or what once was with what will be. speaking of anachronistic analysis let’s discuss the defending world champions.

Italy
obvious – they are very experienced. they are the world cup holders. they have Gigi Buffon and Marcelo Lippi.
pitfalls – can they find the net consistently? their top goalscorer is Gilardino… and he’s the only one with career double digit goals. they have an old defense anchored by a Cannavaro about three years past his prime. they were exposed by Brazil and Egypt, both excellent attacking teams, at the confederations cup. they only tied the one good team in their qualification group.
verdict – this is the end of an era… in an easy group. but when your national coach hopes a club’s fortunes, nevermind one that started zero italians in the european cup final, is good omen… what the @#$% is he talking about?

Paraguay
obvious – very strong qualifying campaign, winning the most games in a tough mini-championship(10). they beat both Brazil and Argentina at home. they are experienced and are ready to make up for a poor 2006 world cup. they have a potent attack.
pitfalls – Bolivia was also able to beat Brazil and Argentina at home. Paraguay started strong in qualifying but have stuttered since. the loss of Slavador Cabanas could take its toll on the team and its expectations.
verdict – this team has the potential to be very good. they are lucky enough to be drawn in a weaker group and should go through to the next stage.

New Zealand
obvious – didn’t they just beat Serbia? didn’t they play Italy really well last year?
pitfalls – not enough big game experience. not enough tournament experience. they are shockingly inconsistent.
verdict – thank you for playing and i hope you get your first international points

Slovakia
obvious – umm… i would love to talk about how their style of play, strong and determined, got them so far but that’s the style of play of most eastern european countries.
pitfalls – participating in its first international tournament. football in Slovakia is the stepbrother to hockey. Slovakia is the stepbrother of the Czech Republic in football. they are inconsistent and probably qualified because nobody else wanted to.
verdict – am i being too mean? i hope i’m wrong again…

group C: thank you for playing

J’en sais beaucoup de par le monde
A qui ceci conviendrait bien :
De loin c’est quelque chose, et de près ce n’est rien.
Jean de la Fontaine, Le Chameau et les Bâtons flottants

From afar it is something big, and close it is nothing. that’s how i feel about this group.

England
check out the previous post: route to ’66

USA
the obvious – the team is the freshest of the major teams at the world cup. most of their players are in early season form. they have shown an ability to compete on the highest level by beating Spain and taking it to Brazil in the first half of the confederations cup final. they have a stable midfield and a pretty decent attack. their defence is experienced and stout. finally americans think this is the year their soccer team makes a deep run at the world cup. what? their opinion counts too!
the pitfalls – that was last year… in 2010 the USA has won one and lost three including a 2-4 drubbing at home. it’s a friendly, the first team wasn’t playing, both of which are good points. this was a Czech Republic squad that didn’t make it to the world cup out of a group that included fellow hopefuls Slovenia – also a good point.
the verdict – i don’t read too much in warm-up games. but, this USA squad has had a rollercoaster of a year with the confederations cup success, the Charlie Davies injury, and the string of bad results of late. one thing has to be said about world cup success, consistency is necessary. this USA squad is very talented but needs to get it together soon.

Slovenia
the obvious – they came out of a pretty deep qualification group. they don’t have any superstar and play like a real team. they surprised a lot of people, including me, when they came back to beat a very good Russia team.
the pitfalls – Slovenia hasn’t fared well in their only two international competitions, the last in 2002, which makes them a relatively inexperienced squad.
the verdict – many pundits are talking about this team as a potential surprise. i don’t buy it. their success lies in getting their first international competition victory.

Algeria
the obvious – this is a team that has been on a meteoric rise over the past two years resulting in a cockfight, and some increased  political tensions, with the previous emir of North Africa, Egypt. they win different types of games from a miraculous comeback against a heavy favorite to a grind-it-out battle against a fierce rival. they have an all-around tough squad.
the pitfalls – maybe it’s the lack of experience in a tournament but this Algeria team, after significant positive results in qualifying to the world cup, lost two games (0-3 and 0-4), tied one game, and won two games at the Africa cup of nations  in january, one win was the miraculous comeback linked above… lack of experience or tournament trend?
the verdict – this team has all the making of a team happy to have qualified. their less than impressive performance at the Africa cup of nations, except for the Ivory Coast game, lead me to believe this team, although a real potential threat, needs some more experience before having any impact at the world cup. unless Saadane can get them to play inspiring football again…