The whole building stank from the fish some guy decided to cook tonight, so I had to escape to the library. Its quite useful to have after-hours access to the library it turns out, and not just for study. The nights are far too cold in Wagga Wagga to go anywhere outside. So, when someone cooks something that has a disgusting, penetrating smell, one has two options- go to the library or go inside the hospital. The hospital has its own assortment of olfactory delights in store for the unwary wanderer, in fact, to get from the dorm to the library requires one to pass through the hospital kitchen area....
I've only been in Wagga for one week in my six week attachment, but it already feels as if I'm completely out of touch with the outside world. Kind of like when I was staying at NIMHANS in Bangalore, except that then I could go to my aunt's place on weekends. But despite being isolated and sequestered in what seems like the middle of nowhere, I've had a pretty good time here. The hospital is quite decent considering its isolation and lack of senior staff. Sure it could use some touching-up but all the equipment is up-to-date and things seem to work quite well here. The teaching is also quite good considering the lack of teaching resources and personnel.
Around Wagga, there isnt much to do!! I walked down to the river which is quite muddy and hardly flows even though the grass fields and forests at the banks of the Murrumbidgee are quiet and peaceful. The botanical gardens, in the middle of a residential area, are also very peaceful, if a little featureless. The other major "attraction" in Wagga is Lake Albert, which I hear is basically dry, I havent as yet visited. I'm planning to ride there on the bicycle that the clinical school has generously lent me for my stay here.
The advantage of rural towns is that hospitals often (not always), are situated near the town centre. So all the shops in Wagga are easily accessible to me by walk or bike if I need. This is very convenient as I can quickly duck down to the shops whenever I need something. Some of my friends had a tough time when they went to Broken Hill and had to walk over 30 minutes to the nearest shop for basic supplies. In Grafton, the hospital is right opposite a maximum security prison, so obviously you've got to walk a fair way before there'll be any shops. So thats been pretty good I suppose.
But the best thing about Wagga is probably that because there is nothing to do, I've been doing a lot of studying. This is very useful with final exams coming up in October. I've studied, in the last week, as much as I studied in the whole year before I came to Wagga. So hopefully by the time I'm back in Sydney, I'll be ready at least in terms of theory, for the big exams...
Monday 31 July 2006
Wednesday 12 July 2006
The trouble with India......
The terrorist attacks on Mumbai's railway network have once again brought India's internal problems to the fore. India has the image of a large, stable, mostly peaceful country, partly because of the atrocious conditions in neighbouring countries Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, Myanmar and Tibet. But a quick glance over recent events in India will confirm that this is hardly the case.
Last week, Kashmiri terrorists cashed in on burgeoning tourism in their state by launching a grenade attack on tourist vehicles, killing eight people. Earlier, a gathering at a sufi shrine outside of Srinagar was attacked, with the intended victim possibly a politician. In fact, there have been plenty of terrorist attacks in Kashmir particularly since the earthquake made border crossings less dangerous. The "ceasefire" after the Kargil crisis in 2003 had only a limited impact on de-escalating violence. Even the bus service linking Srinagar with Muzzafarabad to enable Kashmiri families to re-unite after decades has been targeted.
The Maoist rebellion is gaining momentum in central India. The train hijacking in the Latehar region in Jharkhand and the prison break staged in Jehanabad in Bihar are examples of the increasing menace these terrorists pose to India. In recent times, their attacks have become more daring, violent, frequent and widespread, causing much concern amongst the State Governments of Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Bengal, Jharkhand, Chhatisgharh and Bihar, the states worst affected by Maoist insurgency. It would be cynical of me, but not entirely unwarranted, to suggest that the targeting of politicians and policemen has made the government take this threat more seriously. The Maoists seem to have finally gotten beyond their initial policies of killing defenceless traffic police and government employees (of any description, usually 'paper-pushers' and other weak targets). They still kill helpless villagers to instill fear in the populace, and still take whatever they can from the land, forcing thousands of poor farmers into further debt. The epidemic of farmer suicides in Andhra Pradesh is not all due to drought and government indifference, though that is certainly a factor.
The far east of India is another region of massive discontent and simmering anger. Assam is continually rocked by attacks on State targets by ULFA (united liberation front assam) and other seperatist organizations. To add further misery to the situation, there has been increased aggression against Bengali Muslims, many of them refugees from Bangladesh, in a overwhelmingly Hindu-majority state. The Nagas, almost entirely converted to Christianity by European missionaries, are demanding a fully independent Christian country in their ancient tribal lands. Ethnic minorities in Nagaland have long faced intense discrimination at the hands of the Nagas. Manipur has at least ten or fifteen seperatist groups controlling parts of the state. The official State government has only a ceremonial role in administration; Manipur is basically run by these various terrorist organizations as they please. Arunachal Pradesh, which the Chinese claim is being "illegally occupied" by India, is another state in the grip of seperatist rebellion. It is now the only site of Sino-Indian border disputes, now that Sikkim has been officially recognized by China, and invaded parts of Ladakh have been ceded to China by India.
Perhaps the most shocking event in India in the last few years was the assault on the Indian parliament in December 2001. Security cannot be expected to be tight on the rail network, in remote villages and in mountainous areas, but surely in the heart of the Indian capital, in the surroundings of the Parlaiment, one would expect greater vigilance.
Even limiting myself to the last few years, it would take me days to get through all the examples of instability in India. I haven't even mentioned the communal violence in Gujrat, the Delhi bombings and the attack on the Sankata Mochan temple in Varanasi. So you can see that the image of India as being largely safe and stable is somewhat exagerrated. So far, India has been held together, giving a semblance of unity. But I do wonder.... Is India on the brink of collapse?? Or am I just too pessimistic at times???
Last week, Kashmiri terrorists cashed in on burgeoning tourism in their state by launching a grenade attack on tourist vehicles, killing eight people. Earlier, a gathering at a sufi shrine outside of Srinagar was attacked, with the intended victim possibly a politician. In fact, there have been plenty of terrorist attacks in Kashmir particularly since the earthquake made border crossings less dangerous. The "ceasefire" after the Kargil crisis in 2003 had only a limited impact on de-escalating violence. Even the bus service linking Srinagar with Muzzafarabad to enable Kashmiri families to re-unite after decades has been targeted.
The Maoist rebellion is gaining momentum in central India. The train hijacking in the Latehar region in Jharkhand and the prison break staged in Jehanabad in Bihar are examples of the increasing menace these terrorists pose to India. In recent times, their attacks have become more daring, violent, frequent and widespread, causing much concern amongst the State Governments of Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Bengal, Jharkhand, Chhatisgharh and Bihar, the states worst affected by Maoist insurgency. It would be cynical of me, but not entirely unwarranted, to suggest that the targeting of politicians and policemen has made the government take this threat more seriously. The Maoists seem to have finally gotten beyond their initial policies of killing defenceless traffic police and government employees (of any description, usually 'paper-pushers' and other weak targets). They still kill helpless villagers to instill fear in the populace, and still take whatever they can from the land, forcing thousands of poor farmers into further debt. The epidemic of farmer suicides in Andhra Pradesh is not all due to drought and government indifference, though that is certainly a factor.
The far east of India is another region of massive discontent and simmering anger. Assam is continually rocked by attacks on State targets by ULFA (united liberation front assam) and other seperatist organizations. To add further misery to the situation, there has been increased aggression against Bengali Muslims, many of them refugees from Bangladesh, in a overwhelmingly Hindu-majority state. The Nagas, almost entirely converted to Christianity by European missionaries, are demanding a fully independent Christian country in their ancient tribal lands. Ethnic minorities in Nagaland have long faced intense discrimination at the hands of the Nagas. Manipur has at least ten or fifteen seperatist groups controlling parts of the state. The official State government has only a ceremonial role in administration; Manipur is basically run by these various terrorist organizations as they please. Arunachal Pradesh, which the Chinese claim is being "illegally occupied" by India, is another state in the grip of seperatist rebellion. It is now the only site of Sino-Indian border disputes, now that Sikkim has been officially recognized by China, and invaded parts of Ladakh have been ceded to China by India.
Perhaps the most shocking event in India in the last few years was the assault on the Indian parliament in December 2001. Security cannot be expected to be tight on the rail network, in remote villages and in mountainous areas, but surely in the heart of the Indian capital, in the surroundings of the Parlaiment, one would expect greater vigilance.
Even limiting myself to the last few years, it would take me days to get through all the examples of instability in India. I haven't even mentioned the communal violence in Gujrat, the Delhi bombings and the attack on the Sankata Mochan temple in Varanasi. So you can see that the image of India as being largely safe and stable is somewhat exagerrated. So far, India has been held together, giving a semblance of unity. But I do wonder.... Is India on the brink of collapse?? Or am I just too pessimistic at times???
Monday 10 July 2006
I'm not going to write much about the final- except to say that the best divers did indeed win. Ironically, it was France that scored through a penalty-from-a-dive, but the Italians needn't fear that their place at the top is going to snatched away. They're still the best simulators in my opinion.
I am going to write about a few of the more interesting and important (to me at least) issues from the world cup.
1. The controversies- how can you possibly escape controversy at a world cup. The two are practically synonymous. We've had two-footed lunge tackles, tackles from behind, offside rulings and time wasting in past world cups, but never has there been an issue as hotly debated as simulation. With at least three games decided by dives, and plenty more instances of simulation in almost every match, it is easily the biggest controversy at a world cup since the "Hand of God". FIFA complicated things by their inept handling of the affair. It was obvious that the referees were incapable of dealing with the situation on the ground; surely this was the hardest directive ever given to referees before a world cup. The only ref who handled diving well, Brazilian Carlos Simon, had a shocker in other areas of refereeing and was not given important matches. It is certainly something they will have to think through very soon with the European club season set to resume in a few weeks.
Even the best young player of the tournament was decided on the basis of simulation- I discussed this in an earlier post. The other big controversy was the frequency with which referees lost control of matches, with violent behaviour and needless yellow and red cards being the result. Portugal and Holland played out one of the most heated matches ever seen at a world cup with 16 yellows and 4 red cards- so how many players is that who escaped a booking??
2. The big blunders. Whether Roberto Baggio missing a penalty or the Dutch choking in a semi-final they should easily won or a red-faced David Seaman being caught off his line, world cups always produce some classic bloopers. This time it was no different- even the managers got in on the action. Pekerman and Parreira hamstrung their extraordinarily talented squads with poor selections, tactics and substitutions. Surely the sight of Messi, Aimar, Saviola, Robinho and Cicinho languishing on the bench as their teams were in the process of losing their quarterfinal matches would've constituted the worst nightmares of Agrentine and Brazilian fans. Pauleta's two one-on-one misses with the keeper cost Portugal a place in the final, after Ronaldo and Deco had played their hearts out creating those chances. Roberto Carlos' mystifying decision to initially tag Henry and then not follow him into the box as the free kick was whipped was an equally fatal mistake. And who can forget Zeljko Kalac's attempt at catching perhaps the weakest shot form outside the area in the whole tournament; a screw-up that did not cost Australia thanks to Kewell's late equalizer. There was of course Cristiano Zaccardo's 'clearance' which travelled at 270 degrees to the intended direction and ended up in Buffon's goal. But the biggest blunder was surely committed by Zinedine Zidane in his final game of professional football. An inexplicable headbutt which left the referee without any option but to brandish the red card with a penalty shoot-out so close by was just inexcusable, no matter what Materazzi said to incite him. Zidane won his country a world cup with a virtuoso performance in '98, in '06 he lost a world cup for France.......
3. The classic goals. It is hard to go past Esteban Cambiasso's goal against Serbia, but here are a few others I thought were pretty good too. Maniche's goal against Holland was the result of some fast, incisive passing through the middle involving all of Portugal's talented midfielders. Fernando Torres' effort against Ukraine, created by Puyol's daring raid was another classic. Asamoah Gyan's goal against the Czechs at the end of a sweeping counterattack was pleasing to the eye. As was Ronaldo's superb finish against Ghana which took him past Gerhard Muller as the highest goalscorer at world cups. Bakary Kone's individual effort in a tournament where there was a dearth of solo goals stood out as well. But I dont think Mexico's goal against Italy in 2002 was surpassed in Germany 2006. Borgetti's headed goal was a stupendous demonstration of how to crack the best defence in the business; a lesson that was not heeded by any team in Germany over the last month.
4. The most impressive teams. I'll have to be brief here or I'll end up writing too much. Australia proved that they are not out of their depth amongst the world's best, as the Socceroos have claimed for years but been unable to prove. The key challenge for this team will be to maintain and consolidate their gains without Guus Hiddink at the helm. Ecuador made impressive progress after a subdued debut in '02. However, nerves got the better of them in the 2nd round- any team other than England would've thrashed them severely. The Mexicans will feel hard done by after playing 210 minutes of frighteningly fast, attacking football against higher rated opponents, Argentina and Portugal, and coming away with nothing. But their domination of youth football for the last few years is likely to come to fruition in 2010 where they will field a formidable team featuring the exciting youngsters Giovanni dos Santos and Carlos Vela. Ghana also put in creditable performances against supposedly superior opposition. But the two most impressive teams for me were Spain and Ivory Coast. Spain, with their armada of talented young players will become stronger over the next few years and be real contenders in South Africa in four years time. The Ivorians were the unluckiest of the 32 teams. They are the only team that can truly claim that they dominated the majority of all their matches and yet failed to qualify for the 2nd round. Except for their disappointing finishing, they were one of the most complete teams on display. I hope that they dont suffer from the usual African inconsistency and disappear into oblivion over the next few years.
5. The finest players. This is always a difficult topic because of the huge range of game times we see amongst various players. Whilst Robinho and Messi were easily the most impressive youngsters on show, they hardly managed a combined game time of 200 minutes. Torres was the player of the tournament for me- he displayed great pace, courage, ball skills, finishing as well as the vital ability to run into gaps at the right time. Yaya Toure and Didier Zokora, the Ivorian central midfielders, were also highly impressive with their dogged defence and speed of turnovers. Toure's passing and Zokora's running were blended together perfectly by coach Henri Michel. Steffan Appiah's tireless tournament was, in cricketing terms, a true "captain's knock". Roberto Ayala's defending was once again world class, as was Lucas Neill's, in all fairness. Vincenzo Grella capped his meteoric rise in international football with an expert exhibition of how to play as an anchorman. However, my favourite player in this world cup was Ecuadorian Luis Antonio Valencia. He has a touch of class about everything he does on the football field; one of the stars of the next world cup, I am sure.....
I am going to write about a few of the more interesting and important (to me at least) issues from the world cup.
1. The controversies- how can you possibly escape controversy at a world cup. The two are practically synonymous. We've had two-footed lunge tackles, tackles from behind, offside rulings and time wasting in past world cups, but never has there been an issue as hotly debated as simulation. With at least three games decided by dives, and plenty more instances of simulation in almost every match, it is easily the biggest controversy at a world cup since the "Hand of God". FIFA complicated things by their inept handling of the affair. It was obvious that the referees were incapable of dealing with the situation on the ground; surely this was the hardest directive ever given to referees before a world cup. The only ref who handled diving well, Brazilian Carlos Simon, had a shocker in other areas of refereeing and was not given important matches. It is certainly something they will have to think through very soon with the European club season set to resume in a few weeks.
Even the best young player of the tournament was decided on the basis of simulation- I discussed this in an earlier post. The other big controversy was the frequency with which referees lost control of matches, with violent behaviour and needless yellow and red cards being the result. Portugal and Holland played out one of the most heated matches ever seen at a world cup with 16 yellows and 4 red cards- so how many players is that who escaped a booking??
2. The big blunders. Whether Roberto Baggio missing a penalty or the Dutch choking in a semi-final they should easily won or a red-faced David Seaman being caught off his line, world cups always produce some classic bloopers. This time it was no different- even the managers got in on the action. Pekerman and Parreira hamstrung their extraordinarily talented squads with poor selections, tactics and substitutions. Surely the sight of Messi, Aimar, Saviola, Robinho and Cicinho languishing on the bench as their teams were in the process of losing their quarterfinal matches would've constituted the worst nightmares of Agrentine and Brazilian fans. Pauleta's two one-on-one misses with the keeper cost Portugal a place in the final, after Ronaldo and Deco had played their hearts out creating those chances. Roberto Carlos' mystifying decision to initially tag Henry and then not follow him into the box as the free kick was whipped was an equally fatal mistake. And who can forget Zeljko Kalac's attempt at catching perhaps the weakest shot form outside the area in the whole tournament; a screw-up that did not cost Australia thanks to Kewell's late equalizer. There was of course Cristiano Zaccardo's 'clearance' which travelled at 270 degrees to the intended direction and ended up in Buffon's goal. But the biggest blunder was surely committed by Zinedine Zidane in his final game of professional football. An inexplicable headbutt which left the referee without any option but to brandish the red card with a penalty shoot-out so close by was just inexcusable, no matter what Materazzi said to incite him. Zidane won his country a world cup with a virtuoso performance in '98, in '06 he lost a world cup for France.......
3. The classic goals. It is hard to go past Esteban Cambiasso's goal against Serbia, but here are a few others I thought were pretty good too. Maniche's goal against Holland was the result of some fast, incisive passing through the middle involving all of Portugal's talented midfielders. Fernando Torres' effort against Ukraine, created by Puyol's daring raid was another classic. Asamoah Gyan's goal against the Czechs at the end of a sweeping counterattack was pleasing to the eye. As was Ronaldo's superb finish against Ghana which took him past Gerhard Muller as the highest goalscorer at world cups. Bakary Kone's individual effort in a tournament where there was a dearth of solo goals stood out as well. But I dont think Mexico's goal against Italy in 2002 was surpassed in Germany 2006. Borgetti's headed goal was a stupendous demonstration of how to crack the best defence in the business; a lesson that was not heeded by any team in Germany over the last month.
4. The most impressive teams. I'll have to be brief here or I'll end up writing too much. Australia proved that they are not out of their depth amongst the world's best, as the Socceroos have claimed for years but been unable to prove. The key challenge for this team will be to maintain and consolidate their gains without Guus Hiddink at the helm. Ecuador made impressive progress after a subdued debut in '02. However, nerves got the better of them in the 2nd round- any team other than England would've thrashed them severely. The Mexicans will feel hard done by after playing 210 minutes of frighteningly fast, attacking football against higher rated opponents, Argentina and Portugal, and coming away with nothing. But their domination of youth football for the last few years is likely to come to fruition in 2010 where they will field a formidable team featuring the exciting youngsters Giovanni dos Santos and Carlos Vela. Ghana also put in creditable performances against supposedly superior opposition. But the two most impressive teams for me were Spain and Ivory Coast. Spain, with their armada of talented young players will become stronger over the next few years and be real contenders in South Africa in four years time. The Ivorians were the unluckiest of the 32 teams. They are the only team that can truly claim that they dominated the majority of all their matches and yet failed to qualify for the 2nd round. Except for their disappointing finishing, they were one of the most complete teams on display. I hope that they dont suffer from the usual African inconsistency and disappear into oblivion over the next few years.
5. The finest players. This is always a difficult topic because of the huge range of game times we see amongst various players. Whilst Robinho and Messi were easily the most impressive youngsters on show, they hardly managed a combined game time of 200 minutes. Torres was the player of the tournament for me- he displayed great pace, courage, ball skills, finishing as well as the vital ability to run into gaps at the right time. Yaya Toure and Didier Zokora, the Ivorian central midfielders, were also highly impressive with their dogged defence and speed of turnovers. Toure's passing and Zokora's running were blended together perfectly by coach Henri Michel. Steffan Appiah's tireless tournament was, in cricketing terms, a true "captain's knock". Roberto Ayala's defending was once again world class, as was Lucas Neill's, in all fairness. Vincenzo Grella capped his meteoric rise in international football with an expert exhibition of how to play as an anchorman. However, my favourite player in this world cup was Ecuadorian Luis Antonio Valencia. He has a touch of class about everything he does on the football field; one of the stars of the next world cup, I am sure.....
Sunday 9 July 2006
Vive Le France
Disclaimer- I must disclose my biases right at the outset. Firstly, in any argument between the colonized and the colonizers, I am likely to sympathize with the colonized. Secondly, I have an inherent bias against the French; their self-aggrandizement and their ingratiousness. And finally, I have no first hand knowledge of the topic I am writing about here. So expect that what I am about to write does not represent an impartial, objective viewpoint.
While thousands of French people have been celebrating their team's winning run at the world cup this week, the Les Bleus' success has not gone down well with one Frenchman. Jean-Marie Le Pen, leader of the National Front Party, believed to be one of the contenders for the Presidential elections when Jacques Chirac steps down, has been grumbling that the French team is not truly representative of the country, and that French people cannot see themselves reflected in this team. Obviously, somebody forgot to tell the thousands of people, white, black and all colours between, celebrating on the streets of Paris this week following France's contentious semi-final win over Portugal.
Le Pen has a long and distinguished career of anti-Semitism, anti-Arabic and anti-Black racism. His portfolio is further bolstered by his calls for stricter persecution of homosexuals, reduction in social welfare benefits for the disabled and stringent opposition to immigration from non-European countries. People in Australia and USA often complain about the intolerant right-wing tactics of respective heads-of-state Howard and Bush Junior, but I believe the French public has much more to complain about if Le Pen were to replace Chirac as President. Even Chirac himself has been actively trying to prevent this eventuality by strongly backing unpopular Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin.
Le Pen's outburst was met with indifference by the French soccer team, particularly veteran Lilian Thuram who dismissed the remarks as insignificant. But the undercurrents of discontent in French soceity have once more been stirred. The country is still recovering from the crippling riots of November 2005 when hordes of discontented youth took to the streets of Paris, Lyon, Marseille, Lille, Strasbourg and many other French cities and torched cars, buses and buildings. In April 2006, there were further protests by the growing masses of French unmeployed and by unions protesting the weakening of labour laws allowing employers more control over "hiring and firing".
So what is wrong with France?? Unfortunately, I dont know much about France, certainly I have no first hand information whatsoever. But I felt that this was a topic worth writing anyway, using second hand sources, internet articles and TV documentaries. If there are any mistakes, I'd like to hear about it and would be happy to make changes....
France does not recognize minorities- "everyone is equal in the Republic" is the official line. The French census does not include questions regarding ethnic origin. So there is no accurate data to determine exactly how many people of non-French origin live in France. It is estimated that 1.5 million of the total population of 59 million is of black African origin, with a further 3 million of Arabic/North African origin, but there is no way to be sure. Almost all of these people originate from former French colonies such as Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Senegal, Ivory Coast etc. There are European minorities including Basque, Portuguese, German, Italian, Polish and of course, Jews, who are not strictly European.
The big social problem in France seem to be that despite State rhetoric about equality and "colour-blindness", discrimination is rife. This is borne out by the statistics- the unemployment rates for Arabic and Black people is twice that of the national average. This is particularly true for the 20-35 age group, which is worrying because these young people are French born and educated, they have never been to Africa and dont speak their parents' mother tongues fluently. They are French, technically, unlike their parents when they first migrated. But they are discriminated against in the same way the previous generation was. In fact, their parents generation found work quite easily because France was in severe shortage of manual labour to power the bustling economy. The illiterate African (from now on, I'm going to use "African" to refer to both black West Africans and Arabic North Africans) was highly sought after, because he was cheap, tolerated all sorts of abuse and still worked hard. Educated Africans, or Africans who could read and write French, found it much harder because employers were suspicious of them and refused to give them work. They were much more likely to revolt, to join the strong trade union movement and to vociferously demand basic human rights. It is interesting that now, the French-educated second generation Africans face the same hurdles that the minority of their educated predecessors faced.
French-Africans (sorry!! I'm not making a conscious effort to sound American...) are underrepresented, or unrepresented to be accurate, in French government. There is the odd token African government official, but no high profile African holds any post of significance. This is the same for corporate France, and for French universities. African schoolkids often complain that they are discouraged from pursuing higher studies and are told to undertake vocational training in the trades or go into unskilled labour. As a result, they are given poor recommendations from their school teachers and principals on their tertiary studies applications. Those that do manage to get an education find it hard to get interviews- Arabic students half-jokingly remark that their chances of getting an interview would be greatly enhanced if their name was Jean or Jacques as opposed to Mohammed or Abdul. Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy had these sort of comments in mind when he wanted to pass a bill which would force jobseekers to disclose their ethnic origin on their resumes. (it was duly rejected- there is little overt racism in France, it is all subtle and hidden beneath the surface, at least its supposed to be)
Such discrimination has meant that there is now a whole of French youth feel displaced and unwanted in their own country. Chronic unemployment and lack of means to move forward in soceity has created a strong feeling of resentment, anger and even hatred amongst these young men. The Paris riots were merely a burst of steam from an overflow valve, an indicator that something is going to explode if changes arent made.
This is not the first time that France has been hit by such unrest. In 1961, thousands of Algerians were massacred on the streets of Paris by the Parisian police, for peacefully protesting against the mass-murder of tens of thousands of Algerians in Algeria by the French military. The French response then was to brutally silence the protests and then pretend that nothing happened. In the 21st century, the chances of success with such a strategy are slim, though Sarkozy and Le Pen would surely disagree. Maurice Papon, the chief of Police who was responsible for the 1961 massacre, was finally convicted for his crimes in 1999. But other French criminals still wander free. Le Pen, himself a war criminal from his days in Algeria, is the prime example. Him and other French commanders were responsible for killing large numbers of Algerians and displacing millions from their homes in one of the largest oppression campaigns since World War II. But all Frenchmen involved in the Algerian Independance war were given unquestioned pardons, so Le Pen and others were prosecuted. The French atrocities in Algeria were not dissimilar to Slobodan Milosevic's crackdown on Muslims, Kosovars and other minorities in Serbia, except that the scale was much larger in Algeria. In fact, France has history of ignoring war crimes as well. Very few French criminals stood trial after World War II despite being responsible for the horrendous slaughter of surrendered enemies. After the Americans liberated France, many of the fragmented Axis squadrons in France surrendered. Those that surrendered to British and American troops were taken to POW camps for war tribunals. Those unfortunates that surrendered to the French were stripped naked and paraded through the streets of French towns before being hung or shot for public entertainment.
France is a country in which racism appears to have deep roots along with an attitude of non-recognition of events and realities that run contrary to the French Revolution motto of liberty, equality and brotherhood. While the abuse suffered by previous generations was overt, but nonetheless tolerated, the discrimination against people of African origin in the 21st century is more subtle, and (poorly) hidden behind rhetoric. The situation has been further inflamed by popular leaders like Sarkozy and Le Pen who push their agenda of intolerance and hatred without any inhibition. The telling remark came from Nicolas Sarkozy, himself the son of Hungarian immigrants, when he stated that he would "scrub" the "filth" off French soceity, referring to the young men, mostly French-born Arabic and black men, who participated in the riots last year.
While thousands of French people have been celebrating their team's winning run at the world cup this week, the Les Bleus' success has not gone down well with one Frenchman. Jean-Marie Le Pen, leader of the National Front Party, believed to be one of the contenders for the Presidential elections when Jacques Chirac steps down, has been grumbling that the French team is not truly representative of the country, and that French people cannot see themselves reflected in this team. Obviously, somebody forgot to tell the thousands of people, white, black and all colours between, celebrating on the streets of Paris this week following France's contentious semi-final win over Portugal.
Le Pen has a long and distinguished career of anti-Semitism, anti-Arabic and anti-Black racism. His portfolio is further bolstered by his calls for stricter persecution of homosexuals, reduction in social welfare benefits for the disabled and stringent opposition to immigration from non-European countries. People in Australia and USA often complain about the intolerant right-wing tactics of respective heads-of-state Howard and Bush Junior, but I believe the French public has much more to complain about if Le Pen were to replace Chirac as President. Even Chirac himself has been actively trying to prevent this eventuality by strongly backing unpopular Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin.
Le Pen's outburst was met with indifference by the French soccer team, particularly veteran Lilian Thuram who dismissed the remarks as insignificant. But the undercurrents of discontent in French soceity have once more been stirred. The country is still recovering from the crippling riots of November 2005 when hordes of discontented youth took to the streets of Paris, Lyon, Marseille, Lille, Strasbourg and many other French cities and torched cars, buses and buildings. In April 2006, there were further protests by the growing masses of French unmeployed and by unions protesting the weakening of labour laws allowing employers more control over "hiring and firing".
So what is wrong with France?? Unfortunately, I dont know much about France, certainly I have no first hand information whatsoever. But I felt that this was a topic worth writing anyway, using second hand sources, internet articles and TV documentaries. If there are any mistakes, I'd like to hear about it and would be happy to make changes....
France does not recognize minorities- "everyone is equal in the Republic" is the official line. The French census does not include questions regarding ethnic origin. So there is no accurate data to determine exactly how many people of non-French origin live in France. It is estimated that 1.5 million of the total population of 59 million is of black African origin, with a further 3 million of Arabic/North African origin, but there is no way to be sure. Almost all of these people originate from former French colonies such as Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Senegal, Ivory Coast etc. There are European minorities including Basque, Portuguese, German, Italian, Polish and of course, Jews, who are not strictly European.
The big social problem in France seem to be that despite State rhetoric about equality and "colour-blindness", discrimination is rife. This is borne out by the statistics- the unemployment rates for Arabic and Black people is twice that of the national average. This is particularly true for the 20-35 age group, which is worrying because these young people are French born and educated, they have never been to Africa and dont speak their parents' mother tongues fluently. They are French, technically, unlike their parents when they first migrated. But they are discriminated against in the same way the previous generation was. In fact, their parents generation found work quite easily because France was in severe shortage of manual labour to power the bustling economy. The illiterate African (from now on, I'm going to use "African" to refer to both black West Africans and Arabic North Africans) was highly sought after, because he was cheap, tolerated all sorts of abuse and still worked hard. Educated Africans, or Africans who could read and write French, found it much harder because employers were suspicious of them and refused to give them work. They were much more likely to revolt, to join the strong trade union movement and to vociferously demand basic human rights. It is interesting that now, the French-educated second generation Africans face the same hurdles that the minority of their educated predecessors faced.
French-Africans (sorry!! I'm not making a conscious effort to sound American...) are underrepresented, or unrepresented to be accurate, in French government. There is the odd token African government official, but no high profile African holds any post of significance. This is the same for corporate France, and for French universities. African schoolkids often complain that they are discouraged from pursuing higher studies and are told to undertake vocational training in the trades or go into unskilled labour. As a result, they are given poor recommendations from their school teachers and principals on their tertiary studies applications. Those that do manage to get an education find it hard to get interviews- Arabic students half-jokingly remark that their chances of getting an interview would be greatly enhanced if their name was Jean or Jacques as opposed to Mohammed or Abdul. Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy had these sort of comments in mind when he wanted to pass a bill which would force jobseekers to disclose their ethnic origin on their resumes. (it was duly rejected- there is little overt racism in France, it is all subtle and hidden beneath the surface, at least its supposed to be)
Such discrimination has meant that there is now a whole of French youth feel displaced and unwanted in their own country. Chronic unemployment and lack of means to move forward in soceity has created a strong feeling of resentment, anger and even hatred amongst these young men. The Paris riots were merely a burst of steam from an overflow valve, an indicator that something is going to explode if changes arent made.
This is not the first time that France has been hit by such unrest. In 1961, thousands of Algerians were massacred on the streets of Paris by the Parisian police, for peacefully protesting against the mass-murder of tens of thousands of Algerians in Algeria by the French military. The French response then was to brutally silence the protests and then pretend that nothing happened. In the 21st century, the chances of success with such a strategy are slim, though Sarkozy and Le Pen would surely disagree. Maurice Papon, the chief of Police who was responsible for the 1961 massacre, was finally convicted for his crimes in 1999. But other French criminals still wander free. Le Pen, himself a war criminal from his days in Algeria, is the prime example. Him and other French commanders were responsible for killing large numbers of Algerians and displacing millions from their homes in one of the largest oppression campaigns since World War II. But all Frenchmen involved in the Algerian Independance war were given unquestioned pardons, so Le Pen and others were prosecuted. The French atrocities in Algeria were not dissimilar to Slobodan Milosevic's crackdown on Muslims, Kosovars and other minorities in Serbia, except that the scale was much larger in Algeria. In fact, France has history of ignoring war crimes as well. Very few French criminals stood trial after World War II despite being responsible for the horrendous slaughter of surrendered enemies. After the Americans liberated France, many of the fragmented Axis squadrons in France surrendered. Those that surrendered to British and American troops were taken to POW camps for war tribunals. Those unfortunates that surrendered to the French were stripped naked and paraded through the streets of French towns before being hung or shot for public entertainment.
France is a country in which racism appears to have deep roots along with an attitude of non-recognition of events and realities that run contrary to the French Revolution motto of liberty, equality and brotherhood. While the abuse suffered by previous generations was overt, but nonetheless tolerated, the discrimination against people of African origin in the 21st century is more subtle, and (poorly) hidden behind rhetoric. The situation has been further inflamed by popular leaders like Sarkozy and Le Pen who push their agenda of intolerance and hatred without any inhibition. The telling remark came from Nicolas Sarkozy, himself the son of Hungarian immigrants, when he stated that he would "scrub" the "filth" off French soceity, referring to the young men, mostly French-born Arabic and black men, who participated in the riots last year.
63 down, no.64 coming up
Germany finished their campaign with a fine 3-1 win over Portugal. Schweinsteiger scored 2 goals and forced the own goal with a solid free kick. While he was not outstanding in his general play, he certainly proved he has a wicked right foot. I like right footed players playing on the left side and vice versa for the exact reason that these players cut inside and shoot from the edge of the box before the defender has time to get set and block. Lahm opened the world cup in the same fashion from left back. In the 3-4 playoff, at right back, Lahm was a spectre of his previous self. Other prominent right footers who play on the left include the Portuguese trio of Simao, Ronaldo and Figo, all of whom can play on either wing. Of course, Lahm with his inability to cross off his left foot runs the risk of being slightly predictable, but it is a skill he will pick up with more experience. Other impressive performers for Germany were Sebastien Kehl, standing in for captain Ballack, and Oliver Kahn, at 37 still one of the best keepers going around.
The Portuguese actually put in a very good performance. But just like their entire tournament, they lacked a cutting edge upfront with Pauleta squandering numerous chances, 2 of which were absolute sitters. Nuno Gomes finally got a goal at the end, perhaps he deserved some more game time. It is the one area the Portuguese need to improve in if they are to be successful in major competitions in coming years. Apart from Figo and Pauleta, the rest of the squad will be unchanged over the next few years. The new core of Ronaldo, Deco, Simao, Carvalho and Meira will be around for the next world cup and provide the perfect skill set to build a team around. They would do well to retain Scolari as coach for at least the next two years.
The most contentious issue of the world cup has been "simulation", as FIFA calls it. It has once again reared his ugly head, this time in the context of the young player of the tournament award. Cristiano Ronaldo was denied the award on the basis of "fair play" i.e. because he dived too much. In a show of atrocious hypocrisy, FIFA instead handed the coveted prize to Lukas Podolsky, a player who does not think twice about following in the footsteps of his captain and taking frequent falls whenever defenders are nearby. It is reasonable for FIFA to claim that fair play is one of the factors taken into account, but to apply this criterion so selectively smacked of double standards. If they truly wanted to factor fair play into it, then Fernando Torres and Luis Valencia should have been the front runners. In fact, even otherwise, I think Torres was the best young talent on show this world cup. Valencia had a fine group stages but was frozen by uncertainty in the high profile encounter with England which cost him the award and possibly his team a quarterfinal date with Portugal.
Klose has more or less secured his Golden Boot award with a 2 goal lead over Henry, the only other player in contention. The player of the tournament is the only other individual award to be decided. As far as I am concerned, the only players in contention are Cannavaro and Zidane. Undoubtedly, the final will be decided on the performances of the two captains. The outsiders for the award are Vieira and Zambrotta, who have both had outstanding tournaments in the shadow of their illustrious captains. The final itself is difficult to call, because of the unpredictability of the Italians. The French will approach the game in the same way they approached their preivous three games. Zidane will be the epicentre of the French attack supported by Vieira and Makelele. They will play the all-park game with everything being filtered through Zidane. Malouda and Ribery will attempt to run off Zidane's insightful through balls, though it will be a mountainous task to get through Cannavaro and Materazzi. The problem with relying on an outstanding defence is that one mistake is all it takes to lose a match, ask Argentina!! For a team that attempts to maintain possession and attack relentlessly, one mistake doesnt matter as much. Thats why I believe that if Italy sit back and play the way they did against Australia, the French will win. The Italians have shown that when they play with intent, no team has been able to thwart them. Germany, Ukraine, Czech Republic and Ghana were all made to look ordinary when the Italians played to their potential. If Pirlo plays higher up the field with Gattuso and Perotta taking a more active role like they did against Germany, then this game may well take the same course as the Argentina-Holland group game. Both teams may well cancel each other out and end up with a 0-0 draw. Even though it sounds boring, I think this will be a fantastic outcome. A tight midfield battle Zidane, Vieira and Makelele versus Pirlo, Gattuso and Perotta would be a fine spectacle indeed....
The Portuguese actually put in a very good performance. But just like their entire tournament, they lacked a cutting edge upfront with Pauleta squandering numerous chances, 2 of which were absolute sitters. Nuno Gomes finally got a goal at the end, perhaps he deserved some more game time. It is the one area the Portuguese need to improve in if they are to be successful in major competitions in coming years. Apart from Figo and Pauleta, the rest of the squad will be unchanged over the next few years. The new core of Ronaldo, Deco, Simao, Carvalho and Meira will be around for the next world cup and provide the perfect skill set to build a team around. They would do well to retain Scolari as coach for at least the next two years.
The most contentious issue of the world cup has been "simulation", as FIFA calls it. It has once again reared his ugly head, this time in the context of the young player of the tournament award. Cristiano Ronaldo was denied the award on the basis of "fair play" i.e. because he dived too much. In a show of atrocious hypocrisy, FIFA instead handed the coveted prize to Lukas Podolsky, a player who does not think twice about following in the footsteps of his captain and taking frequent falls whenever defenders are nearby. It is reasonable for FIFA to claim that fair play is one of the factors taken into account, but to apply this criterion so selectively smacked of double standards. If they truly wanted to factor fair play into it, then Fernando Torres and Luis Valencia should have been the front runners. In fact, even otherwise, I think Torres was the best young talent on show this world cup. Valencia had a fine group stages but was frozen by uncertainty in the high profile encounter with England which cost him the award and possibly his team a quarterfinal date with Portugal.
Klose has more or less secured his Golden Boot award with a 2 goal lead over Henry, the only other player in contention. The player of the tournament is the only other individual award to be decided. As far as I am concerned, the only players in contention are Cannavaro and Zidane. Undoubtedly, the final will be decided on the performances of the two captains. The outsiders for the award are Vieira and Zambrotta, who have both had outstanding tournaments in the shadow of their illustrious captains. The final itself is difficult to call, because of the unpredictability of the Italians. The French will approach the game in the same way they approached their preivous three games. Zidane will be the epicentre of the French attack supported by Vieira and Makelele. They will play the all-park game with everything being filtered through Zidane. Malouda and Ribery will attempt to run off Zidane's insightful through balls, though it will be a mountainous task to get through Cannavaro and Materazzi. The problem with relying on an outstanding defence is that one mistake is all it takes to lose a match, ask Argentina!! For a team that attempts to maintain possession and attack relentlessly, one mistake doesnt matter as much. Thats why I believe that if Italy sit back and play the way they did against Australia, the French will win. The Italians have shown that when they play with intent, no team has been able to thwart them. Germany, Ukraine, Czech Republic and Ghana were all made to look ordinary when the Italians played to their potential. If Pirlo plays higher up the field with Gattuso and Perotta taking a more active role like they did against Germany, then this game may well take the same course as the Argentina-Holland group game. Both teams may well cancel each other out and end up with a 0-0 draw. Even though it sounds boring, I think this will be a fantastic outcome. A tight midfield battle Zidane, Vieira and Makelele versus Pirlo, Gattuso and Perotta would be a fine spectacle indeed....
Sunday 2 July 2006
Shangri-La Express
The much anticipated Shangri-La Express was officially launched this week in China. Connecting the central Chinese hub of Golmud with the Tibetan capital Lhasa, it was believed by the Chinese dictatorship to be the missing piece in the integration of Tibet into the People's Republic. Coming at a cost of USD3.6b, the project has been completer almost a year ahead of schedule. It was inaugurated with much pomposity, with all the usual propaganda and fanfare, by the Communist heirarchy earlier this week.
With an average elevation of 4,200 m and a peak elevation of over 5,000 m, it is easily the highest railway in the world. It is indeed an amazing feat of engineering, and as President Hu Jintao points out, a landmark achievement in railroad history. The construction workers battled against -30 C temperatures, low oxygen concentrations (because of altitude) and the cracking whip of their government. The Shangri-La railway is a status symbol for modern China as the Chinese prepare to leave behind the painful past and embrace the future.
But grave concerns have been raised about the impact of the Golmud-Lhasa stretch of the railway (the Xining-Golmud section was completed in 1984- it operates at under 1000m altitude). The Tibetan people are worried that the rail connection with central China will further dilute and oppress their culture. Already, Chinese outnumber Tibetans in Tibet; 7.5 million to 6 million. Now, with ease of travel to and from China, and the increased commercial opportunities (freight costs will fall by an estimated 75%), they fear that more and more Chinese will flood into Tibet. The Chinese government predicts that the Tibetan economy will grow enormously in the coming years- the Tibetans counter that they do not have any share in this as it is the Chinese settlers that reap the benefits and send the money back into China. Not much of it actually remains in Tibet. The only substantial investments in Tibet are government initiatives such as the Shangri-La Express, the extensive road network designed to service the Indo-China border for military access and the diabolic replica of Tiananmen Square imposed on the front courtyard of the Potala palace. An influx of foreign tourism is also expected; but again Chinese merchants are poised to gain the most from this.
However, beyond commerce, tourism and patriotism, lies the real significance of the Shangri-La railroad. It is China's permanent reminder to Tibet, as if the grotesque Mao poster opposite the Potala wasnt enough, that there is no way out for Tibet; that they are irrevocably bound to Chinese imperialism. The true importance of the railway is symbolic. It represents to not only the Tibetans, but also the Uighurs and other minorities in western China that China is the only option.
The rest of the world, despite China's enthusiasm and protests from Tibetans (they're always ignored I suppose), has not been excited by these developments in China and Tibet. If not for the environmental concerns raised about the Golmud-Lhasa track, it is unlikely that I would have even heard about this whole thing. Over 75% of the track runs over permafrost; soil that is permanently in a frozen state that occurs in areas where the mean annual temperature is below the freezing point of water. The construction in itself is not complicated (except by the temperature and air pressure) but the problem occurs when heat generated in the construction is transmitted into the ground and causes melting. The effect of such a massive construction on a delicate ecosystem largely untouched by humans is unknown. No-one exactly how fragile the Tibetan permafrost is; obviously, this concerns many environmentalists. Then of course, there is the issue of garbage and toilet waste being dumped into this pristine alpine desert. The Chinese government has assured western critics that the trains are equipped with garbage compactors to store all rubbish on board and that toilet effluent will also be stored and dumped into the sewerage systems at major train stations.
I believe that the biggest issue facing the Shangri-La will be one of safety. Soil temperatures are rising in parallel with air temperatures around the world. Whether you believe in global warming or not, this is a recorded fact. As this trend continues, and indeed, accelerates, the extent of permafrost will decrease. Continuous permafrost, such as in Tibet, will become discontinuous (seasonal) permafrost i.e. it will thaw for certain periods in the year when mean temperatures are above 0 C. This will be disastrous for the railroad as it puts tonnes of pressure on the ground, which permafrost can absorb, but boggy wet soil?? The Chinese government has rubbished these claims as fictitious. Now, I'm not sure if any data exists for Tibet, but rising soil temperatures have been recorded in many parts of the world, and there doesnt seem to be any reason to believe that Tibet is special in this regard. In fact, in neighbouring Nepal, there has been a large increase in unseasonal thawing of glaciers, flooding of alpine lakes and landslides in the last decade- all symptoms of rising temperature, global warming if I may say so.
With an average elevation of 4,200 m and a peak elevation of over 5,000 m, it is easily the highest railway in the world. It is indeed an amazing feat of engineering, and as President Hu Jintao points out, a landmark achievement in railroad history. The construction workers battled against -30 C temperatures, low oxygen concentrations (because of altitude) and the cracking whip of their government. The Shangri-La railway is a status symbol for modern China as the Chinese prepare to leave behind the painful past and embrace the future.
But grave concerns have been raised about the impact of the Golmud-Lhasa stretch of the railway (the Xining-Golmud section was completed in 1984- it operates at under 1000m altitude). The Tibetan people are worried that the rail connection with central China will further dilute and oppress their culture. Already, Chinese outnumber Tibetans in Tibet; 7.5 million to 6 million. Now, with ease of travel to and from China, and the increased commercial opportunities (freight costs will fall by an estimated 75%), they fear that more and more Chinese will flood into Tibet. The Chinese government predicts that the Tibetan economy will grow enormously in the coming years- the Tibetans counter that they do not have any share in this as it is the Chinese settlers that reap the benefits and send the money back into China. Not much of it actually remains in Tibet. The only substantial investments in Tibet are government initiatives such as the Shangri-La Express, the extensive road network designed to service the Indo-China border for military access and the diabolic replica of Tiananmen Square imposed on the front courtyard of the Potala palace. An influx of foreign tourism is also expected; but again Chinese merchants are poised to gain the most from this.
However, beyond commerce, tourism and patriotism, lies the real significance of the Shangri-La railroad. It is China's permanent reminder to Tibet, as if the grotesque Mao poster opposite the Potala wasnt enough, that there is no way out for Tibet; that they are irrevocably bound to Chinese imperialism. The true importance of the railway is symbolic. It represents to not only the Tibetans, but also the Uighurs and other minorities in western China that China is the only option.
The rest of the world, despite China's enthusiasm and protests from Tibetans (they're always ignored I suppose), has not been excited by these developments in China and Tibet. If not for the environmental concerns raised about the Golmud-Lhasa track, it is unlikely that I would have even heard about this whole thing. Over 75% of the track runs over permafrost; soil that is permanently in a frozen state that occurs in areas where the mean annual temperature is below the freezing point of water. The construction in itself is not complicated (except by the temperature and air pressure) but the problem occurs when heat generated in the construction is transmitted into the ground and causes melting. The effect of such a massive construction on a delicate ecosystem largely untouched by humans is unknown. No-one exactly how fragile the Tibetan permafrost is; obviously, this concerns many environmentalists. Then of course, there is the issue of garbage and toilet waste being dumped into this pristine alpine desert. The Chinese government has assured western critics that the trains are equipped with garbage compactors to store all rubbish on board and that toilet effluent will also be stored and dumped into the sewerage systems at major train stations.
I believe that the biggest issue facing the Shangri-La will be one of safety. Soil temperatures are rising in parallel with air temperatures around the world. Whether you believe in global warming or not, this is a recorded fact. As this trend continues, and indeed, accelerates, the extent of permafrost will decrease. Continuous permafrost, such as in Tibet, will become discontinuous (seasonal) permafrost i.e. it will thaw for certain periods in the year when mean temperatures are above 0 C. This will be disastrous for the railroad as it puts tonnes of pressure on the ground, which permafrost can absorb, but boggy wet soil?? The Chinese government has rubbished these claims as fictitious. Now, I'm not sure if any data exists for Tibet, but rising soil temperatures have been recorded in many parts of the world, and there doesnt seem to be any reason to believe that Tibet is special in this regard. In fact, in neighbouring Nepal, there has been a large increase in unseasonal thawing of glaciers, flooding of alpine lakes and landslides in the last decade- all symptoms of rising temperature, global warming if I may say so.
Surprises, Irony And A Chance For Revenge
A surprising exit for Brazil and England!!
For Brazil, the result was somewhat unexpected, whilst for England, the manner in which they played before being eliminated was the surprise.
The Brazilians players are probably as dumbfounded as we are. They're not quite sure what happened out there. Basically, they played it like a training run and France swamped them. The manner of the French domination was not reflected in the scoreline, luckily for the Brazilians I must say. Zidane was (I have to say it, I know its oftrepeated) sublime; his movement, dribbling and vision once more reminded people why he is considered to be the best player since Maradona. The Frenchmen rallied around the aging star and produced the sort of performance not seen since Euro 2000. The Brazilians, despite a solid effort from Ze Roberto, were lacklustre. In an inexplicable display, their standard of play actually regressed going from the 2nd round to the quarters. This has not happened to a Brazilian team since an equally inexplicable capitulation at the hands of Zidane in the '98 final. I'm not quite sure what more to say about this one......
England must be feeling terrible after losing in penalties to an undeserving Portugal. The English have played poorly so far in the tournament and won 3 and drawn 1. Yesterday, they played their best match in ages and lost!! That's the wonderful irony of world cup football. Eriksson must be wishing he had gone back to boring long ball tactics with the good old 4-4-2. I am not exactly a fan of English football, in fact I'm heavily critical of their tactics on most occasions, but the way they lost this one was cruel. They made a serious effort to play a short passing game, to use all eleven players in attack, and to entertain for once. Owen Hargreaves, much maligned by the English sports media (absolute idiots- there's a very good reason why he has been a key midfielder at Bayern Munchen under Hitzfeld and Beckenbauer's tutelage since age 19), produced one of the best performances by a midfielder I have seen in this world cup. He was the only player still running at the end of extra time. But it was all to no avail as England crashed out in penalties once again at the hands of Portugal. There are some teams that are perennial penalty-chokers; England are right up there with the Dutch as two of the worst.
The saddest moment for me however was the picture of David Beckham sitting alone in the dugout choking back tears after being substituted in the 53rd minute. An unfitting end for one of the champions of English football. He proved rather ineffectual against the spritely Nuno Valente on the right of midfield, and based purely on his perormance, deserved to be taken off, especially considering what Aaron Lennon added to the team with his speed and enthusiasm. But Beckham is so much more than just a right midfielder; he is an inspiration to a generation of young English footballers. I wonder what the players on the field were thinking when they saw their captain barely keep himself under control on the bench.....
I think Eriksson erred in taking his captain off, because England had a few free kicks just on the edge which Lampard predictably blasted wide. Beckham, as he showed against Ecuador, is THE man for those occasions. It seems as if it was probably the wrong decision in retrospect. But, admirably, th English stuck to their goal of playing good (continental??) football and went down in flames.
Portugal won with their worst display so far. Deco's absence made an enormous difference to their gameplay. Against a better team, surely they would have lost. But such is their luck that they live to fight another day- a rematch of the Euro 2000 semifinal, a chance for revenge. That match in Holland in 2000 was a black day for Portuguese football. Having matched France for nearly 90 minutes, they lost to a last minute penalty when Abel Xavier was adjudged to have handballed; a fierce free kick unavoidably thudded into his shoulder. This provoked a violent reaction from the Portuguese players, several of whom served lengthy bans. Nuno Gomes is the only player who served a ban who's still in the squad; but he has been a fringe player for the last six years despite immaculate club form. That game scarred his international career before it took off. Now, Portugal enter this semifinal with a much tougher squad. If they match France the way they did six years, it will be difficult for the resurgent Frenchmen to reach their second final in three attempts. With Deco coming back into the team, I find it difficult to see how the French will stop Portugal. They played unimaginatively against England; but given their form so far in the tournament, and their newfound resilience and willingness to get dirty and brawl, I think they will edge out France. However, underestimate Zidane and the Zidane effect at your own peril.
For Brazil, the result was somewhat unexpected, whilst for England, the manner in which they played before being eliminated was the surprise.
The Brazilians players are probably as dumbfounded as we are. They're not quite sure what happened out there. Basically, they played it like a training run and France swamped them. The manner of the French domination was not reflected in the scoreline, luckily for the Brazilians I must say. Zidane was (I have to say it, I know its oftrepeated) sublime; his movement, dribbling and vision once more reminded people why he is considered to be the best player since Maradona. The Frenchmen rallied around the aging star and produced the sort of performance not seen since Euro 2000. The Brazilians, despite a solid effort from Ze Roberto, were lacklustre. In an inexplicable display, their standard of play actually regressed going from the 2nd round to the quarters. This has not happened to a Brazilian team since an equally inexplicable capitulation at the hands of Zidane in the '98 final. I'm not quite sure what more to say about this one......
England must be feeling terrible after losing in penalties to an undeserving Portugal. The English have played poorly so far in the tournament and won 3 and drawn 1. Yesterday, they played their best match in ages and lost!! That's the wonderful irony of world cup football. Eriksson must be wishing he had gone back to boring long ball tactics with the good old 4-4-2. I am not exactly a fan of English football, in fact I'm heavily critical of their tactics on most occasions, but the way they lost this one was cruel. They made a serious effort to play a short passing game, to use all eleven players in attack, and to entertain for once. Owen Hargreaves, much maligned by the English sports media (absolute idiots- there's a very good reason why he has been a key midfielder at Bayern Munchen under Hitzfeld and Beckenbauer's tutelage since age 19), produced one of the best performances by a midfielder I have seen in this world cup. He was the only player still running at the end of extra time. But it was all to no avail as England crashed out in penalties once again at the hands of Portugal. There are some teams that are perennial penalty-chokers; England are right up there with the Dutch as two of the worst.
The saddest moment for me however was the picture of David Beckham sitting alone in the dugout choking back tears after being substituted in the 53rd minute. An unfitting end for one of the champions of English football. He proved rather ineffectual against the spritely Nuno Valente on the right of midfield, and based purely on his perormance, deserved to be taken off, especially considering what Aaron Lennon added to the team with his speed and enthusiasm. But Beckham is so much more than just a right midfielder; he is an inspiration to a generation of young English footballers. I wonder what the players on the field were thinking when they saw their captain barely keep himself under control on the bench.....
I think Eriksson erred in taking his captain off, because England had a few free kicks just on the edge which Lampard predictably blasted wide. Beckham, as he showed against Ecuador, is THE man for those occasions. It seems as if it was probably the wrong decision in retrospect. But, admirably, th English stuck to their goal of playing good (continental??) football and went down in flames.
Portugal won with their worst display so far. Deco's absence made an enormous difference to their gameplay. Against a better team, surely they would have lost. But such is their luck that they live to fight another day- a rematch of the Euro 2000 semifinal, a chance for revenge. That match in Holland in 2000 was a black day for Portuguese football. Having matched France for nearly 90 minutes, they lost to a last minute penalty when Abel Xavier was adjudged to have handballed; a fierce free kick unavoidably thudded into his shoulder. This provoked a violent reaction from the Portuguese players, several of whom served lengthy bans. Nuno Gomes is the only player who served a ban who's still in the squad; but he has been a fringe player for the last six years despite immaculate club form. That game scarred his international career before it took off. Now, Portugal enter this semifinal with a much tougher squad. If they match France the way they did six years, it will be difficult for the resurgent Frenchmen to reach their second final in three attempts. With Deco coming back into the team, I find it difficult to see how the French will stop Portugal. They played unimaginatively against England; but given their form so far in the tournament, and their newfound resilience and willingness to get dirty and brawl, I think they will edge out France. However, underestimate Zidane and the Zidane effect at your own peril.
Saturday 1 July 2006
My Beloved Spain
Spain once again tragically crashed out of a tournament and in doing so, plunged a proud nation into sorrow. However, this time, the sorrow and disbelief is tinged with a touch of satisfaction, and hope for the future. Unlike past occasions, the Spanish public and media were fully supporting their team. In fact, according to Phil Ball, never have the Spaniards stood as one behind their football team in the quarter of a century he has spent in Spain. Luis Aragones must surely be given credit for selecting and guiding a skilled, youthful team to the country's best world cup performance since 1950. Yes they've reached the last 8 a few times whereas they crashed out in the second round this time, but their performances have captivated the imagination of a world audience. At the start of every tournament, it is customary to question whether Spain will finally perform to expected standards, usually with a hint of sarcasm. In Germany 2006, there was BELIEF, not just amongst Spaniards, but amongst the worldwide media and public.
This is what made it even more bitter for the players to lose the way they did. All of the Spanish squad grew up watching the national team jump from failure to failure; none of them were around in the glory days of di Stefano. Now, they were finally a part of a team which could seriously dream of winning. But it was not to be. The tears of the young Spaniards were a powerful reminder that it takes more than youthful exuberance and eyecatching elegance to succeed at the top level. The Spanish trio of Fabregas, Xavi and Alonso were schoolboys compared to Zidane, Vieira and Makelele, both in terms of age and tactical nous. Whilst the Spanish midfielders possessed greater speed, alacrity and combined skill on the ball, the French easily outdid them in strength, tenacity and grit which often counts for more in world cups. How often have the darlings of the tournament lost in tragic circumstances- Puskas's magnificent Magyars in '54, Cruyff's Orange army in '74 and the brilliant Brazilian team led by Socrates in '82 being prime examples. Once again, history repeated itself (pun not intended....initially).
For me, just like the Spanish public, this world cup was a huge triumph for Spain. In years of following Spanish football, never have I felt that the team has done justice to its incredible potential. Finally, Spain have shown the world that they can play, and that the quality of the Spanish league is not due to South American stars playing in Spain. Finally, Spain has been able to accept a defeat on the world stage. Finally, Spain exit a tournament without the tag of chokers, for losing to the old master Zizu is no disgrace. Finally, Spain have hope for the future, with the average age of the team 24, and the majority of the star performers being under the average age.
2010 cannot come soon enough for the Spaniards; the likes of Torres, Fabregas, Reyes, Villa, Xavi and Iniesta with four years of European experience, will be at the peak of their game. Of course, expectations will be higher than ever, but they will learn from this experience and come prepared. I am making an early prediction that Spain will be a contender in four years time!!
In other matches, Italy thumped Ukraine. Marcelo Lippi has proven to be a shrewd tactician. He has switched between catenaccio and a more free-flowing game befitting the skill level of his players expertly. Against Australia and Czech Republic, teams who he knew would come forward willingly, he sat back and absorbed pressure and only attacked on the counter. Whereas against the unpredictable Ghanaians in the first match, he attacked with intent. The USA game was an aberration due to disciplinary reasons. And last night, once again he adapted his play superbly. Ukraine are a confidence team, that is, the longer they stay in the game the better they become, the more self-belief they accrue and the stronger their attack becomes. This was demonstrated cleearly in the group games against Spain and Tunisia. Spain hit hard early and demoralized the debutants. After this, they controlled the game and ripped Ukraine to shreds. Lippi adopted the same philosophy and Italy came out with attacking intent. The early goal put the game beyond Ukraine with 2 2nd half goals sealing the victory. Despite Ukraine creating plenty of opportunities, because they conceded early, every Buffon save weakened them. Italy will have a tougher task against Germany, who rode on luck and home support to defeat the unfortunate Argentines.
In a perplexing display, Germany started the match in a sombre mood, allowing Argentina to enjoy 65% of the possession. The last time this happened, Serbia were flayed 6-0. To their credit, the German defence, which I have criticized without restraint, held firm. The first piece of misfortune for the Argentines was that they scored early in the 2nd half. This roused Germany from its slumber with nearly 40 minutes still to play. The second instance of bad luck came when keeper Abbondanzieri picked up an injury and was substituted by Leo Franco who had not played a match for over 6 weeks. Germany eventually equalized through Klose (this wasnt Franco's fault, no keeper would've stopped Klose's close range header) and took the game into extratime. Argentina's next unlucky turn came when their normally calm unfazed manager Pekerman made two rash substitutions. He replaced Crespo with Cruz, who is slower and not as predatory as the man he replaced; a bizarre choice. Then, even more bizarrely he replaced playmaker Riquelme with Cambiasso and stranded Messi and Aimar on the bench. To protect a lead by bringing on a tall player and a defensive midfielder is pure folly against a rampant Germany with vociferous home support. No doubt that his keeper's injury caught Pekerman unprepared, but his decision to take off his two most likely sources of goals and two penalty-takers proved costly in the end. Extratime never looked like yielding a goal with both teams, the Germans more so, looking for a shootout.
While Ayala's penalty miss was a surprise, Cambiasso never looked like scoring. He approached with trepidation and poked a limp shot into Lehmann's eager hands. The Germans, in contrast, stepped up with confidence and did not give Leo Franco a chance, though I do feel Abbondanzieri might have kept Argentina in the contest a bit longer. Neuville and Ballack exuded confidence whilst Podolsky, potentially a weak link, converted his penalty nonchalantly. Borowski unhesitatingly slammed home what proved to be the winner. Lehmann anticipated correctly on four out of four occasions, got a touch three out of four and saved two out of four. A fine individual effort in the likeness of Oliver Kahn, the legend he has replaced in the German team.
So a Germany-Italy semifinal awaits us. While its hard to tip against Germany barnstorming to the finish line in Berlin, Italy have all the qualities required to make the final. A tough defence, willpower and nerve to absorb long periods of pressure, and an incredibly powerful and often underestimated strike force. A difficult match to predict in my opinion. My only fear is that it could become a dull, uninspiring affair. The Italians certainly have it in their hands as to what sort of entertainment this one will provide. If they close ranks from the outset, then go to sleep and set your alarm clocks to get up in two hour's time for the penalty shootout.......
This is what made it even more bitter for the players to lose the way they did. All of the Spanish squad grew up watching the national team jump from failure to failure; none of them were around in the glory days of di Stefano. Now, they were finally a part of a team which could seriously dream of winning. But it was not to be. The tears of the young Spaniards were a powerful reminder that it takes more than youthful exuberance and eyecatching elegance to succeed at the top level. The Spanish trio of Fabregas, Xavi and Alonso were schoolboys compared to Zidane, Vieira and Makelele, both in terms of age and tactical nous. Whilst the Spanish midfielders possessed greater speed, alacrity and combined skill on the ball, the French easily outdid them in strength, tenacity and grit which often counts for more in world cups. How often have the darlings of the tournament lost in tragic circumstances- Puskas's magnificent Magyars in '54, Cruyff's Orange army in '74 and the brilliant Brazilian team led by Socrates in '82 being prime examples. Once again, history repeated itself (pun not intended....initially).
For me, just like the Spanish public, this world cup was a huge triumph for Spain. In years of following Spanish football, never have I felt that the team has done justice to its incredible potential. Finally, Spain have shown the world that they can play, and that the quality of the Spanish league is not due to South American stars playing in Spain. Finally, Spain has been able to accept a defeat on the world stage. Finally, Spain exit a tournament without the tag of chokers, for losing to the old master Zizu is no disgrace. Finally, Spain have hope for the future, with the average age of the team 24, and the majority of the star performers being under the average age.
2010 cannot come soon enough for the Spaniards; the likes of Torres, Fabregas, Reyes, Villa, Xavi and Iniesta with four years of European experience, will be at the peak of their game. Of course, expectations will be higher than ever, but they will learn from this experience and come prepared. I am making an early prediction that Spain will be a contender in four years time!!
In other matches, Italy thumped Ukraine. Marcelo Lippi has proven to be a shrewd tactician. He has switched between catenaccio and a more free-flowing game befitting the skill level of his players expertly. Against Australia and Czech Republic, teams who he knew would come forward willingly, he sat back and absorbed pressure and only attacked on the counter. Whereas against the unpredictable Ghanaians in the first match, he attacked with intent. The USA game was an aberration due to disciplinary reasons. And last night, once again he adapted his play superbly. Ukraine are a confidence team, that is, the longer they stay in the game the better they become, the more self-belief they accrue and the stronger their attack becomes. This was demonstrated cleearly in the group games against Spain and Tunisia. Spain hit hard early and demoralized the debutants. After this, they controlled the game and ripped Ukraine to shreds. Lippi adopted the same philosophy and Italy came out with attacking intent. The early goal put the game beyond Ukraine with 2 2nd half goals sealing the victory. Despite Ukraine creating plenty of opportunities, because they conceded early, every Buffon save weakened them. Italy will have a tougher task against Germany, who rode on luck and home support to defeat the unfortunate Argentines.
In a perplexing display, Germany started the match in a sombre mood, allowing Argentina to enjoy 65% of the possession. The last time this happened, Serbia were flayed 6-0. To their credit, the German defence, which I have criticized without restraint, held firm. The first piece of misfortune for the Argentines was that they scored early in the 2nd half. This roused Germany from its slumber with nearly 40 minutes still to play. The second instance of bad luck came when keeper Abbondanzieri picked up an injury and was substituted by Leo Franco who had not played a match for over 6 weeks. Germany eventually equalized through Klose (this wasnt Franco's fault, no keeper would've stopped Klose's close range header) and took the game into extratime. Argentina's next unlucky turn came when their normally calm unfazed manager Pekerman made two rash substitutions. He replaced Crespo with Cruz, who is slower and not as predatory as the man he replaced; a bizarre choice. Then, even more bizarrely he replaced playmaker Riquelme with Cambiasso and stranded Messi and Aimar on the bench. To protect a lead by bringing on a tall player and a defensive midfielder is pure folly against a rampant Germany with vociferous home support. No doubt that his keeper's injury caught Pekerman unprepared, but his decision to take off his two most likely sources of goals and two penalty-takers proved costly in the end. Extratime never looked like yielding a goal with both teams, the Germans more so, looking for a shootout.
While Ayala's penalty miss was a surprise, Cambiasso never looked like scoring. He approached with trepidation and poked a limp shot into Lehmann's eager hands. The Germans, in contrast, stepped up with confidence and did not give Leo Franco a chance, though I do feel Abbondanzieri might have kept Argentina in the contest a bit longer. Neuville and Ballack exuded confidence whilst Podolsky, potentially a weak link, converted his penalty nonchalantly. Borowski unhesitatingly slammed home what proved to be the winner. Lehmann anticipated correctly on four out of four occasions, got a touch three out of four and saved two out of four. A fine individual effort in the likeness of Oliver Kahn, the legend he has replaced in the German team.
So a Germany-Italy semifinal awaits us. While its hard to tip against Germany barnstorming to the finish line in Berlin, Italy have all the qualities required to make the final. A tough defence, willpower and nerve to absorb long periods of pressure, and an incredibly powerful and often underestimated strike force. A difficult match to predict in my opinion. My only fear is that it could become a dull, uninspiring affair. The Italians certainly have it in their hands as to what sort of entertainment this one will provide. If they close ranks from the outset, then go to sleep and set your alarm clocks to get up in two hour's time for the penalty shootout.......
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)