Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Well done Tim, in-depth analysis of the ones that failed to make it, rather than going for a tabloid-esque blog on Maradona's open invitation to supply him oral pleasure. Great to see you resist that temptation (writing about it that is ;) ).

Tim

Brilliant piece once again as usual. just got a quick question- I learnt the preent AFA president has neever sacked the national team manager, instead most of them choose to resign. What are the views of the Argentine, are they happy to see Maradna lead them to the next world cup? Do you think Maradona would be the Manager come 2010 cos I can see nothing but anihilation for that team if the play the likes of Brazil, Spain or Germany in the world cup.

Tim,

Do you think it's a case of when the country is doing well all efforts go on that generation and not on the next?

Only when countries and indeed clubs are forced to look to the next batch they will which has resulted in the inevitable peaks and troughs in the game.

I echo number 1's praise - coverage of the Argentine soap opera has been overwhelming and it was refreshing to see someone take a step back and look at other aspects of the South American qualifying campaign.

Great piece, as usual, Tim.

From what I saw of Colombia in the qualifiers, they were not clinical enough in front of goal.

Some ex-Colombain players I know, who are doing a coaching course in Argentina, feel that Colombian football is regressing - they reckon too much emphasis being placed on the physical side of the game, and not enough on technique and skill - especially in kids coaching.

All seems a long way off from those carefree days of Valderama, Asprilla and Freddy Rincon.

I find it sad, because the manager of that great early 90's Colombian team, Carlos Maturana, was a man with a very clear football philosophy, but now his ideas seem to be considered out of date in the modern football.I read an interview with Maturana in an Argentinian paper a year or two, and got the impression that he was struggling to find a job in football.

Anyone know where he is now?
------------------

On another note - While, it's true that, as you say, the usual teams qualified, do you not think that the gaps in terms of quality have narrowed?

I mean, points-wise, it was all quite close, with positions constantly changing throughout the campaign, with only two (Brazil & Paraguay) sealing their qualification before the last round of matches (the last FIFA international week of the campaign/last 2 games). That hasn't happened before, has it? - since the one group format began.

www.football-journo.com

Hi Tim,
The decline of Columbia is sad to see especially as they were a great team to watch in the 90s.
Also, I wanted to ask about Paraguay and Chile and how far you think they are capable of going in next years world cup?

www.football-journo.com

#2 He may have "requested the resignation" of a couple though.

another good article Tim. It's obvious why, but it's felt very international-led for a while now, what's going on in the domestic game?

Also, I came across an article from 2007 of yours regarding Lucas, has your view of him changed considering his recent travails at Liverpool.

Great Blog Tim - good insight in the woe's at Columbia and really sad considering the magic that Valderama and Asprilla produced.

Nice article which indirectly highlights the great accomplishment of Paraguay, a country with only 6 million people. The Albirroja is heading to their 4th successive Fifa World Cup. The new generation of players picked up where the one led by Jose Chilavert left.

countries who do not maintain a naturally competetive domestic league, will always struggle in the long run. their generation has now passed, and even if they did make the finals, like in 2002 & 2006 for ecuador, and 90,94 and 98 for columbia, they would be in no way equipped to challenge for the trophy.

nbody will miss them from the tournament, another distinctly average team (chile) will take their place. good in qualification poor in tournament. it happens in europe too. will switzerland challenge for the final...i doubt it.

Colombia's main reason for not qualifying is the statistics. 18 matches played, 14 scored with 8 matches were they failed to hit the back of the net. Although if you look at their defensive record its fairly decent compared to the others who missed out.

I personally think they've sacrificed a bit of the flair and attacking dynamism that made them a joy to watch in the 90's and now are a hollow shell of that side that thrashed Argentina in Buenos Aries in '93. They need both a reinvention of their style of play, going back to playing a bit more open attacking football and avoiding the closed defensive style, perhaps try and discover a bit more adventure in their play.

I'm really looking forward to Venezuela in the 2014 qualifiers though and I'm really glad you ended your piece on them Tim. They have steadily improved over the last decade and seem to have in place a good new generation of players to slot inside along the veteran campaigners like Arango, Rey, Rondon and Maldonado. They will be threat in three years time, absolutely no question about it.

One thing which you have missed out though is that for the next cycle of World Cup Qualifiers, Brazil will not be there so this perhaps opens up the group a little and gives teams like Venezuela a greater chance over 16 games then it does over 18.

#10

"nbody will miss them from the tournament"

I really hate it when people make such stupid comments. It shows a lot of disrespect.

It is a shame Ecuador didn't make it as they're a team I like. That Colombia team circa 1993/1994 was also class act but as you say Tim they have slipped quite badly over the years and I don't think they were ever going to make it to 2010.

What about the problems in Peru? I was out there just over a year ago and the national team was in turmoil for all sorts of reasons both on and off the field. I wrote an article about it at the time:



Do you think once the banned players are back and the off the pitch stuff is sorted they will be okay Tim, or are the problems deeper than that? They don't seem to have the pool of talent these days that's for sure.

Good blog Tim, but I have to say I'm suprised you didn't say anything bout Maradona's potty mouth! (not that you needed to).

I hope you can also comment on Honduras; little nation, but made it to the world cup. And they have quite decent players, some winning rave reviews in the EPL such as Hendry Thomas, Maynor Figueroa, Wilson Palacios, and outside the EPL David Suazo (feel free to add any others!) What's their secret of success?

Now that Chile have qualified, can you tell us more about them? Have they a pair like partnership Salas and Zamorano in 98?

#10,

Plus, to me, Ecuador were one of the most exciting teams in Germany 2006. They tore apart Poland when no one expected it.

ALIMANA - ok, the neutral will not miss them from the tournament. as a team of footballers, i do not see them offering any more of a challenge than chile, they will not progress past the 2nd round. I would put my house on that.

Not disrespectful, the truth. What difference does it make if France, Germany, Brazil, England, knock Chile out, or Ecuador out?

#15,

The great difference with the ZASA team and this one is that the current one is more complete and don't depend on just two great players.

Although Honduras is off your patch, thanks for your reply Tim!

you mentioned "local journalists were stressing..." do you ever run into valdererrama during your work? what does HE think? is he involved w/ the national team program?

#18 If the French make it, Ireland is a very tough draw.

Tim,
There has been a ton of talk in Colombia about hiring a foreign coach for the national team. The proponents of such an idea argue that it would be the only way to keep "business-influences" away from the selection process. Personally, I'm not really sure if bringing in an Argentine, Brazilian or even European coach will guarantee a truly unbiased "seleccion". I'd love to hear your thoughts on the matter.

I think that a huge problem has been the lack of continuity of both players and a coach (getting rid of Rueda a few years ago was a huge mistake as demonstrated by what he's done with Honduras). Also, I'm afraid that the talent is not there anymore. I think Cordoba is the only player currently active in one of the "big" teams (Inter), and he is not a starter anymore. Rodallega, arguably our best striker, plays for Wigan (no offence to Latics fans out there). Oh, sorry, forgot about Falcao at Porto...
Are there any players that in your mind were not given a fair chance that could've made a difference this time around?

Finally, I'm taking up any recommendations on who I should support in SA next year. Anybody...? I'll take the Swiss if nothing is suggested.

Cheers,

Danny

Danny, Ghana! Surely the outside tip for the tournament.

Tim, I’m really pleased that you mentioned Giulliano and Rafael Tolói in your postbag section because it shows that we at FootBrazil are on the right track! We feature these two players plus Sandro Ranieri (Inter), Boquita (Corinthians), and De Souza (Palmeiras) in our Brazil: the talent factory 2009 feature in this week’s programme. For those unfortunates who can’t get FootBrazil, I’ll be posting the video sometime in the next week or so.
Thanks
Jon

I'm excited to see Paraguay in action at the WC.

Hi Tim,

It is a sad blow for Ecuador, however, it will be interesting to see how a struggling Argentina fair and who will be in charge at SA 2010.

Kee up the good work,
MOP13
www.manonplatform13.blogspot.com
www.thedirtytackle.blogspot.com

Tim, I think from your analysis it shows that it is very competitive in South American football and teams have to stay focussed all the time especially given that they are already two big power houses in Brazil and Argentina and the rest of the teams are more or less fighting for the remaining 2 and a half places.

But it would be good also to see the likes of Venezuela on the big stage and that could be possible with Brazil hosting and hence one extra place.

What do you make of Neymar's development? Can he go on to become as good as Robinho or better? I'm looking forward to watching him & Phillipe Coutinho in the U-17 World Cup later this month.

Tim,

I am dumbfounded that you, of all bloggers in Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ, would blurt out "the execution of Andres Escobar" in such tasteless and careless fashion. You mention it as casually as Tin Delgado's English career - a mere anecdote that may or may not be relevant to your argument.

Fifteen years later, it is still a delicate and sensitive subject that saddens most Colombians. Who cares about football, the world cup, or whatever effect it had on the national team? A life was lost in a horrible murder that also killed a little part of a country.

May Andres Escobar rest in peace and his memory and legacy preserved and respected.

To the man at no 5 who says Chile,Ecuador,are thoroughly replaceable and will just be cannon fodder clearly hasn't been watching the world cup.Considering the immense resources available to them,England,Germany and France should be winning every world cup between them.But did France score a single goal in the 2002 edition?With the top scorers of Serie A and the EPL starting up front for them.Did Italy get beat by Egypt,a team that might not even make it to the world cup,in the recent confederations cup?And what about Cameroon's wonderful run in Italia 90,losing to England on some very dodgy refereeing?And why was some Italian firing a South Korean after 2002?Yes there will be routine losses,but the world cup throws up so many surprises,ask Spain what happened against Nigeria in '94,that its reckless to bet your house mate.Do this,slowly extricate your foot from your mouth,otherwise,come the World Cup 2010,you'll be outta a house,and will have sprung a five toed tail.

To the man at no 10 who says Chile,Ecuador,are thoroughly replaceable and will just be cannon fodder clearly hasn't been watching the world cup.Competitive league?With Europe's pinching?Considering the immense resources available to them,England,Germany and France should be winning every world cup between them.But did France score a single goal in the 2002 edition?With the top scorers of Serie A and the EPL starting up front for them.Did Italy get beat by Egypt,a team that might not even make it to the world cup,in the recent confederations cup?And what about Cameroon's wonderful run in Italia 90,losing to England on some very dodgy refereeing?And why was some Italian firing a South Korean after 2002?Yes there will be routine losses,but the world cup throws up so many surprises,ask Spain what happened against Nigeria in '94,that its reckless to bet your house mate.Do this,slowly extricate your foot from your mouth,otherwise,come the World Cup 2010,you'll be outta a house,and will have sprung a five toed tail.

To poster number 5,my bad.No offence intended.You're an upstanding member of society with very sober and sage views.

Tim

Would Argentina still regard Uruguay as the eternal foe considering the close proximity of the 2 capital cities? Or do Brasil hold sway as the main ire for the people and the media.
I thought the final game in Montevideo was a wonderful throwback to the old days when these 2 nations' encounters truly meant something beyond special; it was THE game. Hopefully Uruguay can make it through the play offs and quite possibly bump into Argentina in the knock out stages in South Africa.
The footballing Gods have an uncanny knack of bringing up the unexpected.

Chile are the next Portugal. They are the best current squad in the "never-won-the-WC" category.

Tim, you say that "The fact that they blew up under pressure makes it easy to forget how good the 1994 side really was." Colombia could have been one of the teams of that World Cup, my hero Asprilla could have been the star, and they started well. The pressure wasn't footballing - shortly before the kick-off against the US, the players received threatening calls from drug lords in Colombia warning that if they didn't win, their wives and children were at risk of kidnap and murder. Asprilla said later that when he and other players should have been getting ready to play, they were on the phone telling their families to pack up and flee into hiding. I saw the game, it was clear that Colombia's minds were elsewhere, they were totally unlike what they had been, and the normally immaculate Escobar scored with a distracted and pointless back-pass which his keeper could never have anticipated. For that mistake, he was shot dead; as the players knew, the threats were real. Blew up? Were shot up, I'd say, you can't blame a very good team for that loss, they'd surely have gone far without the death threats.

Asprilla may have been the best player to have played for my club, Newcastle, his perception and creativity were so far ahead of what was then a very good side that often his skillful play wasn't taken advantage of. In the international context (more SA games shown in Australia where I now live than in the UK), he was often dominant, I recall one 3-0 win in which it was 'Tino and 21 others, he made all three goals, scoring one, the oppositon had no answer.

Surely the biggest threat to future qualifycation campaigns for ecuador is FIFAs threat to ban games at altitude (again).Its no coincedence that all competitive home games are now played at altitude rather than alternating between quito and guayaquil as they used to.
great blog as usual.
thanks

36 - Argentina and Uruguay have a far too friendly relationship. This was evident in the 1-1 draw they played out to ensure Uruguay finished in fifth place in qualifying for 2002. Colombia did protest about this and there was a lot of talk of match fixing. Colombia missed out on 5th place on goal difference in that qualifying campaign.

Hi Tim,

Nice to see you're covering some of the less glamorous news in South America. I agree with you that Colopmbia should be performing much better in international terms, both in terms of population, the popularity of football and relatively big clubs. I have a question for you. What do you think about the rule in Colombian football that means that teams in the national league must field a player under the age of 18? The idea is to develop players for the national side but to me it seems pointless given that most of the youngsters get ten minutes on the pitch before being subbed. POtential it will do more harm than good in terms of damaging confidence, burn-out from stress etc. Does this only take place here or is there a precedent? Do you think long-term this can benefit the national side?Thanks

Colombia have missed out but they have an interesting group of players in the range of 21-23 that will be at a prime age by the time the qualifiers for 2014 come around. Players like Freddy Guarin, Giovanni Moreno, Radamel Falcao, Cristian Zapata, etc.

I think it is difficult to see countries like Colombia retain their 'footballing identity'. It's sad but the way modern football is going, the top youngsters leave to go abroad so early they don't develop that identity. Most of the players from the 90s teams like Rincon, Alvarez, Valderrama, etc. all stayed playing domestically in Colombia into the beginning of their mid 20s. That doesn't happen today. Players move abroad far too early and as a result the Colombian style, if you will, is not instilled in them.

Hi Tim,

Brilliant article once again!

I am just surprised at the lack of coverage by Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ of the U-20 World Cup final match. Was it because Ghana won and not any of the other fancied European or South American countries? This does not seem fair and I was just wondering if you might be able to shed some light on this.

Hi Tim,
This is a really good piece,well done. My only grief is about the point you made about the Brazilian U-20 side being "unlucky to lose" against Ghana in the finals. Though, that really wasn't your main point of discussion, i think it is very unfair to the Ghanaians considering the good show they put out during the tournament. You don't usually see an African team or any other team for that matter being a better attacking side than Brazil in any World Cup. The African side did not only do that, they actually scored more goals than the Brazilians did in the whole tournament and their striker went on to win both the FIFA golden ball and golden boot after the tournament.
Having followed football for a while now, i very much know and understand the fact that the best team do not always win but that wasn't the case here; as to me, the Ghanaians were a better side, technically.

As an American living in , I can tell you that the locals here are very disappointed with their teamΒ΄s showing this year. As a matter of fact, someone threw a hand grenade into a local pub during the last game. And you thought the Hooligans were crazy!

Vickery once again is blindsighted by football which isn't Brazilian!

37 minutes is a very little football to judge what the Ghananian display would have resembled for the duration of the game. Just because a team has a shady first half it is not to say a team could outperform the team in the second half or the final 10 minutes of the match to win the game.

Please Mr Vickery, try to have a bit more of a balanced perspective of choosing to write about football when it involves Brazilian football.

Dear Tim:

I always enjoy your blog. Keep up the good and insightful work. I also agree with you that bizarre does even not start to describe Maradona's behaviour before, during and after matches. We call a guy like this in Argentina 'un mono con navaja'(a monkey with a razor blade), more or less a time bomb.

However... there are two Insua's in Maradona's chaotic smorgasbord of callups: One is Emiliano, of Liverpool and the other one is Federico, of Boca. One is a left back the other one an attacking, roaming type midfielder, who has a good left foot and was brought back to Boca from Mexico to actually replace Datolo, who was sold to napoli.


Emiliano Insua and Datolo play in different positions. Insua is the most timid of left backs, who lacks a right foot and usually steps up past the centreline and then turns the ball back to the inside to the closest midfielder: a somewhat limited player in a position where I would mention Evra and maybe A. Cole as the model to follow in today's football. The only player Argentina has that resembles a modern attacking left back would be Monzon (although he is young and a bit wild)and to a lesser extent Papa.

Datolo is one of the typical 'carrileros' midfielders that have gone up and down a lane between the sideline and 20 meters in and that have been very popular in Argentina lately. There was the now retired Sorin, the best at it, and now there are Maxi Rodriguez and Jonas Gutierrez who repeat the mould.

I would not put Federico Insua in this category because he likes to show up, a la Messi, on the right, turning in to shoot with his left. That's where he was in the diluvian evening vs Peru when his low shot went to Palermo's foot in the winning goal.

Inexplicably, Datolo, after playing well against Brazil was not called back and Federico Insua was summoned to replace him. Somehow lucky Diego got contributions from the strange choice he made, but we are not fooled here in BA. Polls indicate that roughly 80% of fans want him out. Godfather Don Julio will decide...

Cheers.

And what about the Ghanian goalie's brand new penalty stopping technique? Nobody commented on this... see, had he played for Liverpool, the beach ball goal would have been saved... he actually runs towards the post while the kicker runs to the ball and gets to the save standing on his feet!!! Ghanian Goalie Guile

Mr Vickery I think you suffer the same fate as do the English, you can't see past your own Brazilian bias (or English alternative). The English think that Rooney is the best footballer in the planet and that the if a player doesn't play in the Prem, they aren't any good. You think that the if Brazil looses, it means that they just had a bad day, no one could possibly be superior.

Mr Vickery, thank you for your response be it wonderfully as incomplete a response as I expected.

Using your words to begin with 'Brazil were unlucky to lose'. Which could be said, as they did dominate the proceedings of the game. However, Ghana were very unlucky with their sending off. To state Ghana were unlucky, is not just my opinion as it was an opinion shared by the Eurosport commentary team.

So, Mr Vickery when you addressed this in point 45 you stated that Ghana did not get past their own halfway line til the time of the sending off, which was a very harsh sending off. The sending off took place at 37 minutes. From my knowledge, the game of football is usually a 90 minute affair played in a form of two 45 minute halves. Even though Ghana were the worse team for the opening progression of the half, they were 'unfortunate' to have had the sending off which effectively turned the course of the game for them.

Yes, for the first 37 minutes off the game Ghana had respected their opponents and played defensively. However, in many games teams are the lesser opponent in the first half and redress the game for the second half. One such game of significance was the Champions League Final in 2008, when Manchester United dominated the first half entirely and Chelsea were quick out of the blocks to dominate the second half in it's entirety. Yes, prior to the sending off Ghana did acknowledge the attacking prowess off their Brazilian counterparts, but when was a match limited to it's first half?

The sending was a pivotal factor in altering the proceedings off the game, and this was a massive factor in the game. Addressing me as being 'blindsighted', a wonderfully 'articulate' and a personal a insult from a Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ journalist, which makes me question the degradation of the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ's integrity on behalf of it's employees.

As a professional journalist Mr Vickery, I am sure you have professional codes of conduct, and from your retort above, it seems you have few regards for such codes. If anyone is being 'blindsighted' the accusation would have to be pointed towards yourself for failing to address the allegations of nationalistic bias, which is a frequent allegation pointed towards your 'journalism' on evidence of replys to this article you have written and others.

#53 the english think that rooney is the best player in the world ? as an english football fan i can assure you 95% disagree,even most manchester united fans would disagree with that. messi,ronaldo & kaka are generaly accepted as the best players in the world in england and not one of them plays in the premiership ! if you are looking for football prejudice perhaps try the mirror .

Tim, definitely agree with your take on Ecuador -- the strikers can be infuriating and the squad is aging at the back. On the keeper situation, what are your thoughts on Alexander Dominguez of LDU Quito? He's just 22 and to me he's looked good during what's been a pretty strong domestic and Copa Sudamericana campaign for Liga. Do you think he'd be someone who could contribute to the Ecuador team for 2014?

Debate is an integral aspect of what it is to be a fan of football, as this wonderfully illustrates the pointlessness of debate in football as it is near enough impossible to have a argument which is founded factually opposed to on opinion.

The standard of refereeing in the Confederations Cup was something discussed on the World Football Phone In, and some people thought on many an occasion it was too harsh. One team in particular who took the brunt of it, was the United States team (who you branded as a 'disgrace'). Refereeing in the U20's til the final, had yet seen the standard of the Confederations Cup.

Matthew Kenyon off the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ wrote that Addo was not the last man to make the tackle and was harsh to be sent off, which is a statement I am in agreement with. Even though I strongly disagree the sending off was just, I am in agreement that it made Ghana much more resilient at the back and consequently made them much tougher to crack. Trying to beat a team a man down is a often a lot more difficult than a team with 11 players.

As for supporting one side or another, I have never read of any allegations of biases towards any other team rather Brazil made against you, I am only aware of Brazilian biases being acknowledged.

When it comes to writing about South American football, it is very interesting to examine the articles written by Marcela Mora y Araujo's who even though writes soley about Argentinian football who from my knowledge in the responses to the articles she writes, is never accused of writing with bias towards the Argentina Team.

Thank you for continuing this debate for avoiding debates with 'my types'. It may seem like a statement of sarcastic content but it isn't in the slightest bit. The majestic irrationality which makes those of rational minds occasionally irrational something which can only ever be invoked by the beautiful game.

Once again thanks for the debate Tim, write about Peru more. Your article titled "All Smiles in San Martin" was one of the best things in football I've ever read.

What is your problem caveman? If you don't like it, don't read it. Simple. Stop trying to incite people and deal with your issues.

Tim, I really appreciate your considered replies to so many posts, including my own. Thanks, you are the best kind of sports journalist, I hope the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ appreciate that. I'll keep an eye out for your SBS/World Game piece.

Greeting to all!

Man what a relief that this WCQ is done for us(Argentina). I am thrilled we got it and did not think we would go to Uruguay and get a win. I was hoping for a draw but a win. And people doubted Marcelo Bielsa's Chile! Shame on them! He is a man that will NEVER taken a dive. The 2002 game vs Uruguay was not a fixed game for those Colombians who want to believe it was, but it was not.

As bad as I feel for the Ecuadorian I am happy we are in. Ecuadorian could of LOCKED in a WC spot sometime agao.

Just look at this,

round 1 lost to Ven 1-0 in Quito
Round 2- Lost to Brasil
Round 3- Lost to Paraguay
Round4- Beat Peru
Round 5- Tied Argentina. Which Palacio scored very late, to snatch away a historic win for Ecuador.

They had many chances, and blew it. Started very slow. See Argentina stared very good, without that great start they would of likely missed out.

Colombia is a tragic story. They have a HISTORY of self destruction. They keep finding ways to hurt themselves. I wish them well but I just can not see them doing well in the future. It makes me sad but nothing I can do. I do not know ANYTHING about their youth(Which I follow the youth teams with a passion). It is strange, as soon as their government started to change for the good, their football turned to the worse.

Maybe 2014 they may qualify. And Tim may answer this question. Since Brasil automatically qualifies for 2014, does the same routine go? Top 4 get automatic births and the 5th place team gets a playoff? If anybody knows this answer, please shed some light on it.

I, for one, really enjoy this series of articles. It is difficult for a team to focus as the Colombia team in 1994 were under so much personal pressure. I feel (from reading as an outsider) Colombia is a bit safer now and President Uribe is cleaning up the country.

Colombia are the sleeping giants of the continent, mainly due to the population (44m) and lack of competition from other sports. This will always lead to them being there or thereabouts, compared to Uruguay which has a population of about 3.5m

Its interesting the debate about Colombia interested in a foreign manager who is not subject to the internal politics of Colombian football, that may work for them (Can I suggest Brendan Rodgers from Reading?!?) This worked for Russia, but not for Poland.

Also interesting is the expat community in United States, there could be some uncovered gems playing in their local leagues? I know that Turkey have a heavy scouting presence in Germany. Perhaps Colombia could do the same?

Nice insights Tim. Thanks for writing yet another fine blog on South American football. This World Cup Qualifying campaign out there with 18 matches per team is a very long one. The fifth placed team has still two more encounters before they can make their travel plans. Uruguay had a decent campaign. And after twenty qualifying rounds no one will regret to see them taking the fifth spot. Best wishes to them and to their opponents.




Dr. Cajetan Coelho

Mr Vickery,
"i tink the red card actually worked to ghana's advantage. firstly, it absolved them of all responsibility to come out to play - in other words, it confirmed their initial strategy of holding on and hoping."

Try to read carefully at what you just wrote. How, in ANY way possible, can one player less than the opposition be of an advantage??? I am sure managers will take your advice and start with 10 players instead of 11 from now on! (being sarcastic, of course) This just goes to support my claim that you are bias, even if innocently. This is a superiority complex that good footballing nations tend to have. It would be more professional of you to say "I am trying to be as neutral as possible, because as you all know I am Brazilian and subsequently that automatically rules out total impartiality."
Thank you for your response anyhow.

#56 "as an english football fan i can assure you 95% disagree,even most manchester united fans would disagree with that. messi,ronaldo & kaka are generaly accepted as the best players in the world in england and not one of them plays in the premiership ! if you are looking for football prejudice perhaps try the mirror ."

Bold claim, as it would mean that you have either met 95% of all Englishmen or have some statistics to support of, none of which you have provided. I can assure you that there are plenty of Englishmen who say "united is better off without ronaldo", "I would rather have Rooney than Messi". To each his own opinion. Also, many have said that south american players, such as players playing in Brazil, do not have the quality to play in the Prem. Others have even went as far as saying that most players in Italy and Spain could not compete in the Prem. This is, ridiculous, my friend. I do not have prejudice against England and it's football, I am actually a great supporter of- and I enjoy the Prem.

Dear Tim,

Please why no mention of the lack of coverage by the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ of Ghana's victory?

Do you equally acknowledge that this ould not have been the case had teh competition been won by one of teh more fancied teams which tehn poses the question of fairness

Can someone explain why African football has dominated the comments section of the South American column?

And I would take a stab at N68's question. I personally think the coverage would have been the same for anyone with the exception of an England victory. The fact the competition was covered by Eurosport rather than one of the main media outlets in the UK says it all.

@69 - We always hear these hollow, unconvincing arguments but I doubt anyone genuinely believes this to be the case.

Interesting you make the point about African football, because I have read several references to Italian and Spanish football on this blog not to mention English football; I am yet to read any complaints. Why then do you choose to make exception for African football?

I would hope that the point has been made and this would be rectified in future because like this or not people notice things like this.

66, Tim's statement about the red card being an advantage to Ghana was easy to understand. Quite simply down to ten men, Ghana had nothing to loose in opening up their play as the expectation from many would be that loosing numerical parity would open the door to defeat. Ghana under these circumstances could just go for it.

Also, I'd just like to say that this Englishman doesn't think Rooney is the best player in the world or perhaps even in England. He is a talent without a question, but I wonder about his development and hitting a glass ceiling but that's a debate for another day.

I'm reading this amid deep irritation at many of the comments of the Ghanaian fan: who cast aspersions at Tim Vickery's integrity, accused him nonsensically of being "blindsighted" by anything not Brazilian, then laughably started crying about journalistic codes of conduct when Tim returned the compliment! Pathetic. If you can dish it out, you have to be able to take it back: get that chip off your shoulder, man.

I don't think there's a better writer in world football than Tim Vickery. Detailed, rigorous analysis of topics which are barely covered by much of the English-speaking media; and unlike many journalists, he's happy to follow up to comments on the blog too. But here's the thing: if people keep insulting him, he's bound to stop. I don't know why so many people think the internet = open season on journalists, and basic standards of courtesy just disappear out of the window; but it's embarrassing when anyone does it, because it ruins the blog for everyone else.

I hope Ghana do very well next summer: Ghana have been the sleeping giants of African football for a very long time, and their achievements in Egypt and in 2006 prove they're really getting their act together now. I'm also really looking forward to seeing how Chile and Paraguay get on (the former because of Bielsa, the latter because they seem to be adding a few attacking strings to their bow at last); and just hope Uruguay join them through the play-offs. To be honest, I suspect Ecuador are now falling back, and probably won't recover for a good few years; Colombia's decline is desperately sad though, for all the reasons Tim and others have given.

Ghana had been an attacking team.
If they won a game by not attacking,they're the worse side in that game.
Interesting "syllogism".
Very Brazilian, don't you think?
Very inflexible,and intolerant to the dynamism that is real-world football.
Do you really have the exact location of where caution crosses into cowardliness?
Is it humanly possible to remain unaffected by a culture in which you may have been immersed for 15years?
And "journalists" have a superhuman reserve in resisting the temptation of subjectivity?
Tim, your heart is right, you do your best,but you're not from Krypton.
You're a great journalist,in spite of it,which is why I come back.