| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| Who's Not Honoring Me Now? - Tonys & MTV Movie Awards | ||||
| ||||
Wednesday, 16 June 2010
The Colbert - Rain rivalry continues...
RAAAAIIIIINNN!!!!!
Tuesday, 15 June 2010
Beating and kicking him mercilessly was totally out of character
In local news this week...
That attack was reported here originally.
I originally came across this story due to my following the issue of anti-Indian violence in Australia. Now the fact that the bashed man was Indian may not be a relevant detail, so I won't focus on it. (Which doesn't mean definitely it wasn't a factor, mind you.) However while racism was clearly one factor in the apparent phenomenon of "curry-bashing", the kind of recklessly aggressive mentality exemplified by Keane and Murcia tells you more about why such things occur, in my opinion.
The attack was caught on CCTV and you can witness it below:
Remember though that Joel Murcia is not some stereotypical street thug from an underprivileged background. He's someone who appears to have gone to a good school and completed an Arts degree.
“This 53 seconds of madness was totally out of character for my client and he will not re-offend,” said Murcia's barrister. I'm in no position to say whether that is true or not, but it makes me wonder; what does actually determines one's character? What about him and his mates vandalising the University sign? Was that "out of character" as well? Plenty of people get drunk every week yet manage to avoid committing crimes while in that state.
Is he of good character because he manages to avoid committing random violence most of the time? Or do we truly judge a man's character on how he acts when placed in a challenging situation? Most people, if caught drunkenly committing a petty crime (and let's be honest, there are plenty of us guys who have done something like that), would either cop it sweet or try to run away. What does it say about the character of a group of people who choose instead to fight security, using the advantage of 3 on 2, and not only that but to mercilessly beat them, kicking and kneeing the men when they are on the ground?
As for the other defendant named in the case, Richard "Ox" Keane, you can check out this Facebook group, seemingly set up by his friends, and judge for yourself what kind of character he might be.
Kicked to death by "persons of good character"
The truth about violence against Indians in Australia
NO JAIL FOR BASHER OF DEAKIN UNIVERSITY SECURITY GUARD
A 23-YEAR-OLD man who “mercilessly beat” a Deakin University security guard has escaped jail time. Joel Murcia pleaded guilty in the Ringwood Magistrates’ Court on Thursday, June 3, to recklessly causing serious injury. The court heard Murcia punched his defenceless victim, Sandi Singh, 17 times, kicked him five times and kneed him once.
Ringwood Magistrate Max Cashmore sentenced Murcia to a four-month intensive corrections order, which will require him to undergo community work, report to authorities twice a week and undergo counselling.
Mr Cashmore said “it was but for the grace of God the victim was not killed” in the frenzied 53-second attack.
The court heard that on September 24 Murcia, co-accused Richard Keane and another man were vandalising a Deakin University sign at 2am after drinking heavily at its bar. Mr Singh and another guard spotted the trio and then an argument and fight broke out. Mr Cashmore said Mr Singh, who was in court, and his colleague were simply doing their jobs and were beaten mercilessly for it. “I’m sorry to you, Mr Singh, and the community is sorry that someone doing his job has to put up with this type of conduct,” he said.
Defence barrister Wayne Henwood told the court his client had finished an arts degree and was attempting to secure work in the film industry. Mr Henwood said a conviction would severely damage his chances of landing a job. “This 53 seconds of madness was totally out of character for my client and he will not re-offend,” Mr Henwood said. But Mr Cashmore said a conviction must be recorded and Murcia only escaped jail because of his age and good references.
In February, co-accused Keane pleaded guilty to recklessly causing injury and received a nine-month community service order without a conviction.
That attack was reported here originally.
I originally came across this story due to my following the issue of anti-Indian violence in Australia. Now the fact that the bashed man was Indian may not be a relevant detail, so I won't focus on it. (Which doesn't mean definitely it wasn't a factor, mind you.) However while racism was clearly one factor in the apparent phenomenon of "curry-bashing", the kind of recklessly aggressive mentality exemplified by Keane and Murcia tells you more about why such things occur, in my opinion.
The attack was caught on CCTV and you can witness it below:
Remember though that Joel Murcia is not some stereotypical street thug from an underprivileged background. He's someone who appears to have gone to a good school and completed an Arts degree.
“This 53 seconds of madness was totally out of character for my client and he will not re-offend,” said Murcia's barrister. I'm in no position to say whether that is true or not, but it makes me wonder; what does actually determines one's character? What about him and his mates vandalising the University sign? Was that "out of character" as well? Plenty of people get drunk every week yet manage to avoid committing crimes while in that state.
Is he of good character because he manages to avoid committing random violence most of the time? Or do we truly judge a man's character on how he acts when placed in a challenging situation? Most people, if caught drunkenly committing a petty crime (and let's be honest, there are plenty of us guys who have done something like that), would either cop it sweet or try to run away. What does it say about the character of a group of people who choose instead to fight security, using the advantage of 3 on 2, and not only that but to mercilessly beat them, kicking and kneeing the men when they are on the ground?
As for the other defendant named in the case, Richard "Ox" Keane, you can check out this Facebook group, seemingly set up by his friends, and judge for yourself what kind of character he might be.
Kicked to death by "persons of good character"
The truth about violence against Indians in Australia
Assorted World Cup thoughts (Day 5)
* While World Cup 2006 was seen as overly defensive, this one is even moreso. Most teams are trying not to lose, rather than playing to win. Overall, it's not that pretty.
* Opening game Mexico vs South Africa was a great way to kick off a tournament, principally because both teams wanted to win and attacked relentlessly. A stark contrast to the game that followed, but unfortunately France's 0-0 draw with Uruguay is likely to be more representative of the tournament overall.
* How come no club side has the will to get the best out of Mexico's Giovanni Dos Santos? The half-Brazilian winger's performance against the South Africans was so reminiscent of a young Ronaldinho it was scary. Yet no club seems to want him or to use him - he was last seen stuck on the bench in Turkey, having been loaned out by Tottenham.
* The Netherlands look a good team, even though they started slowly against Denmark. In the absence of Arjen Robben, Hamburg winger Eljero Elia dazzled on the left wing; expect a buzz post-WC as the big clubs tussle for his signature. The Oranje's combination of midfield toughness (Van Bommel, De Jong) and tricky attackers (Sneijder, Van Persie) should see them at least make the semi-finals.
* Cote D'Ivoire (Ivory Coast) are the real deal. Unfortunately fate seems to be against them, with a nasty draw and their superstar striker under an injury cloud. But even without Drogba for most of the game, they utterly dominated a listless Portugal team, yet couldnt put it in the back of the net. Striker/winger Gervinho looks like a hell of a player when running at defenders, and the team pass well and are tough in the tackle. They even look to have patched up their previous weakness for conceding soft goals at the back.
* How does France coach Raymond Domenech still have a job? France look uninterested and uninspired - what a waste of talent. The departure of Zidane, Vieira and Makelele (the archetypal midfield 3) has left a massive hole in ability, toughness and leadership; a huge problem when you have a bad coach. Apparently some of the senior players like Domenech because they can bully him into putting them in the starting lineup. The non-selection of Karim Benzema looks like utter foolishness after the laughable display up front by Anelka and Gignac.
* Cameroon's coach sent out the tallest lineup I'd ever seen, with 6'3 guys all over the place. Against a small team like Japan, the logic seemed to be to overpower them with size and strength. Unfortunately, there was a distinct lack of creativity on the field for the Indomitable Lions, and playing their deadliest striker (Samuel Eto'o) as a right winger is just stupid. Only once playmaker Achille Emana came on in the second half did they look like a team of real footballers.
* South Korea looked great - in particular Park Ji-Sung, who in national colours looks twice the player he is for Manchester United. But I suspect the "Taeguk Warriors" looked so impressive mostly due to complete ineptness of the Greeks, whose lack of ambition is an insult to their passionate fans. Like Australia, they are a defensive-minded team who cannot actually defend.
* Germany were very impressive, but Australia were rubbish. At best, they are a limited team of hard workers, but coach Pim Verbeek's negative game plan took away what little chance they had of getting anything from the game. Going down 4-0 to Zie Germans is no disgrace, but the manner in which they went down was. How does a team designed to be ultra-defensive manage to concede 4?
* In that game, Tim Cahill's red card was undoubtedly harsh; it was a bad tackle and worth a yellow, but he was clearly trying to pull out of it and thus was not reckless. But the other issue with Cahill is the degree to which Verbeek mishandled him. He is an average midfielder who does 2 things exceptionally well - head the ball, and arrive late in the box to score. But playing him as a lone striker nullifies the latter skill.
* Despite their draw with New Zealand, Slovakia look like a proper team. They've got some exciting young players who constantly threaten on the counterattack. However, don't confuse them with Slovenia, who are as dull as dishwater and got lucky in beating Algeria. How the Slovenes managed to knock Russia out of qualification is beyond me. And how Slovenia and Algeria can both end up in the same group is a cosmic injustice - particularly in comparison to Group G (Brazil, Ivory Coast, Portugal).
* The best individual performance for me so far has been Nigerian keeper Vincent Enyeama. His acrobatic saves somehow kept a rampaging Lionel Messi off the scoresheet. The Nigerians put in a good fist of it against the Argentines - losing 1-0 is nothing to be ashamed of - but for a team whose best players are mostly strikers, playing only one upfront seems a waste.
* Opening game Mexico vs South Africa was a great way to kick off a tournament, principally because both teams wanted to win and attacked relentlessly. A stark contrast to the game that followed, but unfortunately France's 0-0 draw with Uruguay is likely to be more representative of the tournament overall.
* How come no club side has the will to get the best out of Mexico's Giovanni Dos Santos? The half-Brazilian winger's performance against the South Africans was so reminiscent of a young Ronaldinho it was scary. Yet no club seems to want him or to use him - he was last seen stuck on the bench in Turkey, having been loaned out by Tottenham.
* The Netherlands look a good team, even though they started slowly against Denmark. In the absence of Arjen Robben, Hamburg winger Eljero Elia dazzled on the left wing; expect a buzz post-WC as the big clubs tussle for his signature. The Oranje's combination of midfield toughness (Van Bommel, De Jong) and tricky attackers (Sneijder, Van Persie) should see them at least make the semi-finals.
* How does France coach Raymond Domenech still have a job? France look uninterested and uninspired - what a waste of talent. The departure of Zidane, Vieira and Makelele (the archetypal midfield 3) has left a massive hole in ability, toughness and leadership; a huge problem when you have a bad coach. Apparently some of the senior players like Domenech because they can bully him into putting them in the starting lineup. The non-selection of Karim Benzema looks like utter foolishness after the laughable display up front by Anelka and Gignac.
* Cameroon's coach sent out the tallest lineup I'd ever seen, with 6'3 guys all over the place. Against a small team like Japan, the logic seemed to be to overpower them with size and strength. Unfortunately, there was a distinct lack of creativity on the field for the Indomitable Lions, and playing their deadliest striker (Samuel Eto'o) as a right winger is just stupid. Only once playmaker Achille Emana came on in the second half did they look like a team of real footballers.
* South Korea looked great - in particular Park Ji-Sung, who in national colours looks twice the player he is for Manchester United. But I suspect the "Taeguk Warriors" looked so impressive mostly due to complete ineptness of the Greeks, whose lack of ambition is an insult to their passionate fans. Like Australia, they are a defensive-minded team who cannot actually defend.
* Germany were very impressive, but Australia were rubbish. At best, they are a limited team of hard workers, but coach Pim Verbeek's negative game plan took away what little chance they had of getting anything from the game. Going down 4-0 to Zie Germans is no disgrace, but the manner in which they went down was. How does a team designed to be ultra-defensive manage to concede 4?
* In that game, Tim Cahill's red card was undoubtedly harsh; it was a bad tackle and worth a yellow, but he was clearly trying to pull out of it and thus was not reckless. But the other issue with Cahill is the degree to which Verbeek mishandled him. He is an average midfielder who does 2 things exceptionally well - head the ball, and arrive late in the box to score. But playing him as a lone striker nullifies the latter skill.
* Despite their draw with New Zealand, Slovakia look like a proper team. They've got some exciting young players who constantly threaten on the counterattack. However, don't confuse them with Slovenia, who are as dull as dishwater and got lucky in beating Algeria. How the Slovenes managed to knock Russia out of qualification is beyond me. And how Slovenia and Algeria can both end up in the same group is a cosmic injustice - particularly in comparison to Group G (Brazil, Ivory Coast, Portugal).
Elderly Indian businessman stabbed to death in Melbourne
The furore about violence in Australia against persons of Indian origin seems to have settled down since last year. But has the violence itself settled down? It's hard to say. This latest fatal incident may well have nothing to with that phenomenon; we'll see as things unfold.
Thursday, 10 June 2010
World Cup: Contenders and Predictions
For those of you who are not enthusiastic about the World Cup - shame on you. But bear with me while I make some predictions for the tournament and rate the main contenders. I'll look back afterwards and laugh at how wrong I was, no doubt.
WINNERS:
Spain. Just too good in every department. Brazil also look a worthwhile bet.
TOURNAMENT'S BEST PLAYER:
I'll go really out on a limb here and say Arjen Robben (Netherlands). If his team do well, the prematurely-balding winger will be at the heart of most of their good play, should he stay fit.
WHICH BIG TEAM WILL DISAPPOINT?
France. Their talented team is riven by internal tensions, they are lacking midfield engine Lassana Diarra, and they have one of the world's most incompetent coaches in Raymond Domenech. They have a relatively easy group but might not make it out.
THE "DARK HORSE" TEAM (WHICH WILL MAKE AN UNEXPECTED RUN DEEP INTO THE TOURNAMENT):
Uruguay could well finish first in their relatively weak group, and in Diego Forlan and Luis Suarez they have two strikers with formidable scoring records in Europe. Serbia may also surprise a few.
HOW WILL AUSTRALIA DO:
Aussie expectations were high after their spirited run in 2006, but this year's team is a dour defensive unit who are severely lacking in attacking flair. They are in a tough group (against Germany, Ghana and Serbia) and while advancement is certainly achievable, I don't like their chances. But if perma-crock Harry Kewell actually stays fit and plays the tournament of his life, you never know.
THE CONTENDERS:
SPAIN
World ranking: 2
The Spaniards usually look promising at World Cups, but have never delivered. But if they ever do make good on their potential, this is surely the year to do it. The team is built around the slick passing of Barcelona duo Xavi and Andres Iniesta, and the finishing of David Villa and Fernando Torres. They will look to pass their opponents to death, but have plenty of options from the bench to change things up; such as pacy winger Jesus Navas and powerful 6'5 striker Fernando Llorente. It's hard to go past them, really. Except it's Spain. They always screw up... and the favourites never win...
ARGENTINA
World ranking: 7
Argentina boast the world's best player in Lionel Messi, and arguably the world's best-ever player, Diego Maradona, as their coach. Unfortunately, as a coach Maradona is a clueless nutjob, and may be this team's greatest weakness. They have an amazing array of striking talent to choose from - Messi, Carlos Tevez, Diego Milito, Gonzalo Higuain and Sergio Aguero - but they cannot all play at once. The midfield is not as blessed but still includes crunching tackler Javier Mascherano and crafty winger Angel di Maria (pictured left). Argentina could easily win it if they manage to gel together, but they are poorly organised and struggle to get the most out of the talent that they have in spades.
BRAZIL
World ranking: 1
Coach Dunga has remade his team in his own image; functional, rather than flamboyant. He has controversially left out Ronaldinho, yet the team are still stacked with talent; Kaka, Robinho, Luis Fabiano and Douglas Maicon to name a few. But while the names are big, their form is an issue. Kaka, World Player of the Year only 3 years ago, is coming off an indifferent season, as is midfield enforcer Felipe Melo. Still, they qualified as the top team in South America, and their world number 1 ranking is no accident. No one seems to be getting overly excited about the Samba King's chances this time around, but they will be hard to score against, and have plenty of goals in them.
NETHERLANDS
World ranking: 4th
The Oranje are always blessed with amazing talent yet seem destined never to quite turn that into a World Cup win. The key for them is whether their defence is strong enough; their attacking punch is not in doubt. Playmaker Wesley Sneijder, striker Robin Van Persie and winger Arjen Robben (pictured left) are all coming into the tournament in scintillating form. The other key will be whether Robben is fit or not; he may have single-handedly led Bayern Munich to the Champions League Final, but he is currently under an injury cloud and is liable to break at any time.
The Dutch always look amazing initially, and then inevitably disappoint. While I'm hoping they break the mould this time, I'm not expecting it to happen.
GERMANY
World ranking: 6th.
Talent-wise, Die Mannschaft are good but not phenomenal; but that's never an issue with the Germans. Their size, strength and clinical efficiency always power them through to the later stages, and you can expect them to make at least the semi-finals; it's just inevitable. They are without their captain Michael Ballack, but he won't really be missed. One player to look out for will be young winger/playmaker Mesut Ozil (pictured left), who is hotly sought after by many of Europe's top clubs. No one's really backing the Germans this time around, but they always do well.
PORTUGAL
World ranking: 3rd.
Portugal struggled through the qualification stages, and still haven't found a top striker after all these years. What they do have is Cristiano Ronaldo, and with him anything is possible. They'll have to first get out of their tough group though, which includes Brazil and the Ivory Coast. Which they may well not do; if you are going to pick one of the big names to flop, the Portuguese might have that dubious honour.
ITALY:
World ranking: 5th
While no one should write off the defending champions, Italy are an ageing team built around players from underperforming Juventus and AC Milan. They will be hard to beat, as they are an experienced and savvy team who know how to get a result. But 4 years ago it was a team made of players in their prime. The stars who did it for them back then are either no longer in the squad, or are starting to creak a little. They do have the benefit of starting in the weakest group in the tournament (with New Zealand, Paraguay and Slovakia).
Will this be the World Cup when an African team emerges as a legitimate contender?
Cool player names to watch out for at World Cup 2010
World Cup 2006 Roundup
WINNERS:
Spain. Just too good in every department. Brazil also look a worthwhile bet.TOURNAMENT TOP SCORER:
David Villa (Spain - pictured right). The Spanish team should, at the very least, make a deep run into the tournament, and to top the scoring charts you need to play a lot of games. Not only is Villa a cracking striker, he has a team of brilliant passers who will serve up chances on a plate for him. If not Villa, I'll plump for Brazil's Luis Fabiano.TOURNAMENT'S BEST PLAYER:
I'll go really out on a limb here and say Arjen Robben (Netherlands). If his team do well, the prematurely-balding winger will be at the heart of most of their good play, should he stay fit.
WHICH BIG TEAM WILL DISAPPOINT?
France. Their talented team is riven by internal tensions, they are lacking midfield engine Lassana Diarra, and they have one of the world's most incompetent coaches in Raymond Domenech. They have a relatively easy group but might not make it out.
THE "DARK HORSE" TEAM (WHICH WILL MAKE AN UNEXPECTED RUN DEEP INTO THE TOURNAMENT):
Uruguay could well finish first in their relatively weak group, and in Diego Forlan and Luis Suarez they have two strikers with formidable scoring records in Europe. Serbia may also surprise a few.
HOW WILL AUSTRALIA DO:
Aussie expectations were high after their spirited run in 2006, but this year's team is a dour defensive unit who are severely lacking in attacking flair. They are in a tough group (against Germany, Ghana and Serbia) and while advancement is certainly achievable, I don't like their chances. But if perma-crock Harry Kewell actually stays fit and plays the tournament of his life, you never know.
THE CONTENDERS:
SPAIN
World ranking: 2
The Spaniards usually look promising at World Cups, but have never delivered. But if they ever do make good on their potential, this is surely the year to do it. The team is built around the slick passing of Barcelona duo Xavi and Andres Iniesta, and the finishing of David Villa and Fernando Torres. They will look to pass their opponents to death, but have plenty of options from the bench to change things up; such as pacy winger Jesus Navas and powerful 6'5 striker Fernando Llorente. It's hard to go past them, really. Except it's Spain. They always screw up... and the favourites never win...
ARGENTINA
World ranking: 7
BRAZIL
World ranking: 1
Coach Dunga has remade his team in his own image; functional, rather than flamboyant. He has controversially left out Ronaldinho, yet the team are still stacked with talent; Kaka, Robinho, Luis Fabiano and Douglas Maicon to name a few. But while the names are big, their form is an issue. Kaka, World Player of the Year only 3 years ago, is coming off an indifferent season, as is midfield enforcer Felipe Melo. Still, they qualified as the top team in South America, and their world number 1 ranking is no accident. No one seems to be getting overly excited about the Samba King's chances this time around, but they will be hard to score against, and have plenty of goals in them.
World ranking: 4th
The Oranje are always blessed with amazing talent yet seem destined never to quite turn that into a World Cup win. The key for them is whether their defence is strong enough; their attacking punch is not in doubt. Playmaker Wesley Sneijder, striker Robin Van Persie and winger Arjen Robben (pictured left) are all coming into the tournament in scintillating form. The other key will be whether Robben is fit or not; he may have single-handedly led Bayern Munich to the Champions League Final, but he is currently under an injury cloud and is liable to break at any time.
The Dutch always look amazing initially, and then inevitably disappoint. While I'm hoping they break the mould this time, I'm not expecting it to happen.
GERMANY
World ranking: 6th.
PORTUGAL
World ranking: 3rd.
Portugal struggled through the qualification stages, and still haven't found a top striker after all these years. What they do have is Cristiano Ronaldo, and with him anything is possible. They'll have to first get out of their tough group though, which includes Brazil and the Ivory Coast. Which they may well not do; if you are going to pick one of the big names to flop, the Portuguese might have that dubious honour.
ITALY:
World ranking: 5th
While no one should write off the defending champions, Italy are an ageing team built around players from underperforming Juventus and AC Milan. They will be hard to beat, as they are an experienced and savvy team who know how to get a result. But 4 years ago it was a team made of players in their prime. The stars who did it for them back then are either no longer in the squad, or are starting to creak a little. They do have the benefit of starting in the weakest group in the tournament (with New Zealand, Paraguay and Slovakia).
Will this be the World Cup when an African team emerges as a legitimate contender?
Cool player names to watch out for at World Cup 2010
World Cup 2006 Roundup
Anyone feel like a Homo Sausage?
Tuesday, 8 June 2010
Will this be the World Cup where an African nation emerges as a legitimate contender?
Short answer: No. Perhaps it should have been, due to it being the first time the tournament has been held on the African continent, but the fates appear to be conspiring against African teams this time around.
South Africa will have to rely on the home support to carry them, because they are one of the weakest teams at the tournament (ranked 90th in the world). In Steven Pienaar the hosts have a creative player capable of turning a game, and have a potentially dangerous striker in Benni McCarthy (although his best days are behind him). No host nation has ever been knocked out at the group stage, but Bafana Bafana are expected to be the first. Their group consists of France, Mexico and Uruguay, and it's a very open group. France have the talent but whether they can do anything with it is always unpredictable. Look for Uruguay to take second spot, but this group is hard to pick. South Africa could surprise, but it's unlikely.
Nigeria (ranked 20th) is a regular feature at the World Cup, and have made it to the round of 16 twice. But for all their talent, they haven't seemed to put it all together of late. They have a host of top strikers - Yakubu Aiyegbeni, Obafemi Martins and Peter Odemwingie, to name a few - but are weaker everywhere else. They are also suffering from the loss of Chelsea midfielder Jon Obi Mikel through injury.
The Super Eagles are grouped together with Argentina, Greece and South Korea. Argentina are virtually guaranteed to top the group, but second spot is up for grabs. I think South Korea will nab it, but the Nigerians have a realistic chance. They don't look particularly convincing though, and it's hard to imagine them getting much further.
Ghana (ranked 32 in the world)was the African success story of the 2006 World Cup, making it out of a tough group before going out to Brazil. But the Black Stars' form of late has been indifferent, and to make matters worse they are without star midfielder Michael Essien, who has been injured all year.
Even without Essien's rampaging presence, Ghana's powerful midfield is one of the strongest at the tournament. They boast Italian-based stars like Sulley Muntari, Kwadwo Asamoah and talismanic captain Stephen Appiah, while Kevin-Prince Boateng and Haminu Dramani can add pace and guile from the wings. But midfield is Ghana's only strength; at the back they are a little suspect, and up front they have few options, with main striker Asamoah Gyan no better than average.
It is hard to see Ghana qualifying from their group, which includes Germany, Australia and Serbia. But while Germany is a lock to progress, second spot is up for grabs, and if they put it all together they could make it to the next step.
One of the teams in the "making up the numbers" category is Algeria (ranked equal 27th in the world). The Desert Foxes somehow overcame African champions Egypt to qualify for their third tournament. But the talent level is just not there. They do have the fortune of being drawn in a relatively weak group though. England should top the group but are not all that convincing; the USA should grab 2nd spot but is not a shoo-in; while Slovenia is well-organised but not all that threatening.
The one African team which most clearly has the talent to make it is the Ivory Coast (ranked equal 27th in the world with Algeria). But their chances have been hamstrung in two ways. Firstly, they are in one of the hardest groups in the tournament; as well as the lowly North Korea, they come up against Brazil (ranked 1st) and Portugal (3rd). This follows on from the previous World Cup when they also landed in the Group of Death.
The Ivorians could surprise, principally because of their superstar striker Didier Drogba. But the Chelsea man, one of the best 10 players in the world right now, fractured his arm in a friendly against Japan and is in doubt.
The team could still surprise, as it has an enviable lineup from top-to-bottom; Yaya Toure and Didier Zokora make an imposing midfield, while Emmanuel Eboue and Kader Keita add inspiration from the wings. Up front, Drogba is complemented by the likes of Salomon Kalou and Gervinho. Also in its favour is Portugal's poor form leading into the tournament. But the Elephants tend to look vulnerable to slip-ups at the back. If the devastating Drogba is in the lineup, this team could accomplish anything; but that's a big if right now.
Cameroon (ranked 19) have the World Cup pedigree of all the African teams, with a quarter-final appearance in 1990. In striker Samuel Eto'o they have a player capable of scoring with aplomb, even if his form is not as sizzling as it was several years ago. Eto'o is unsettled recently, following a red card against Portugal and a spat with legendary Cameroonian ex-player Roger Milla. There is a lot of talent in the team, but the question is how well it functions together; three of their best players (Alex Song, Jean Makoun and Stephane M'bia) are all defensive midfielders, which leads to a selection problem.
The Indomitable Lions find themselves in Group E, alongside Holland, Denmark and Japan. Holland are the favourites, and while Cameroon should beat the other two, they'll be no easybeats. Denmark in particular looked strong in qualification. I think Cameroon will be the only African team to get out of their group, but I'm not convinced they will go any further; they could just as easily bomb out early.
South Africa will have to rely on the home support to carry them, because they are one of the weakest teams at the tournament (ranked 90th in the world). In Steven Pienaar the hosts have a creative player capable of turning a game, and have a potentially dangerous striker in Benni McCarthy (although his best days are behind him). No host nation has ever been knocked out at the group stage, but Bafana Bafana are expected to be the first. Their group consists of France, Mexico and Uruguay, and it's a very open group. France have the talent but whether they can do anything with it is always unpredictable. Look for Uruguay to take second spot, but this group is hard to pick. South Africa could surprise, but it's unlikely.
Nigeria (ranked 20th) is a regular feature at the World Cup, and have made it to the round of 16 twice. But for all their talent, they haven't seemed to put it all together of late. They have a host of top strikers - Yakubu Aiyegbeni, Obafemi Martins and Peter Odemwingie, to name a few - but are weaker everywhere else. They are also suffering from the loss of Chelsea midfielder Jon Obi Mikel through injury.
The Super Eagles are grouped together with Argentina, Greece and South Korea. Argentina are virtually guaranteed to top the group, but second spot is up for grabs. I think South Korea will nab it, but the Nigerians have a realistic chance. They don't look particularly convincing though, and it's hard to imagine them getting much further.
Ghana (ranked 32 in the world)was the African success story of the 2006 World Cup, making it out of a tough group before going out to Brazil. But the Black Stars' form of late has been indifferent, and to make matters worse they are without star midfielder Michael Essien, who has been injured all year.
Even without Essien's rampaging presence, Ghana's powerful midfield is one of the strongest at the tournament. They boast Italian-based stars like Sulley Muntari, Kwadwo Asamoah and talismanic captain Stephen Appiah, while Kevin-Prince Boateng and Haminu Dramani can add pace and guile from the wings. But midfield is Ghana's only strength; at the back they are a little suspect, and up front they have few options, with main striker Asamoah Gyan no better than average.
It is hard to see Ghana qualifying from their group, which includes Germany, Australia and Serbia. But while Germany is a lock to progress, second spot is up for grabs, and if they put it all together they could make it to the next step.
One of the teams in the "making up the numbers" category is Algeria (ranked equal 27th in the world). The Desert Foxes somehow overcame African champions Egypt to qualify for their third tournament. But the talent level is just not there. They do have the fortune of being drawn in a relatively weak group though. England should top the group but are not all that convincing; the USA should grab 2nd spot but is not a shoo-in; while Slovenia is well-organised but not all that threatening.
The one African team which most clearly has the talent to make it is the Ivory Coast (ranked equal 27th in the world with Algeria). But their chances have been hamstrung in two ways. Firstly, they are in one of the hardest groups in the tournament; as well as the lowly North Korea, they come up against Brazil (ranked 1st) and Portugal (3rd). This follows on from the previous World Cup when they also landed in the Group of Death.
The Ivorians could surprise, principally because of their superstar striker Didier Drogba. But the Chelsea man, one of the best 10 players in the world right now, fractured his arm in a friendly against Japan and is in doubt.
The team could still surprise, as it has an enviable lineup from top-to-bottom; Yaya Toure and Didier Zokora make an imposing midfield, while Emmanuel Eboue and Kader Keita add inspiration from the wings. Up front, Drogba is complemented by the likes of Salomon Kalou and Gervinho. Also in its favour is Portugal's poor form leading into the tournament. But the Elephants tend to look vulnerable to slip-ups at the back. If the devastating Drogba is in the lineup, this team could accomplish anything; but that's a big if right now.
Cameroon (ranked 19) have the World Cup pedigree of all the African teams, with a quarter-final appearance in 1990. In striker Samuel Eto'o they have a player capable of scoring with aplomb, even if his form is not as sizzling as it was several years ago. Eto'o is unsettled recently, following a red card against Portugal and a spat with legendary Cameroonian ex-player Roger Milla. There is a lot of talent in the team, but the question is how well it functions together; three of their best players (Alex Song, Jean Makoun and Stephane M'bia) are all defensive midfielders, which leads to a selection problem.
The Indomitable Lions find themselves in Group E, alongside Holland, Denmark and Japan. Holland are the favourites, and while Cameroon should beat the other two, they'll be no easybeats. Denmark in particular looked strong in qualification. I think Cameroon will be the only African team to get out of their group, but I'm not convinced they will go any further; they could just as easily bomb out early.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)