Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns

World Cup

The U.S. loss to the Czech Republic (3-0) was well deserved. We were full of fear and we were lazy. I have no idea why we played like that. I think we can do a lot better, and we must. Saturday against Italy will be our last game unless we win. We must do exactly the opposite of what we did we the Czechs. We must have courage and we must attack, and then attack again, and then continue the attack. Always the attack.

Discussions - 8 Comments

Well, for certain, the US’ speed advantage didn’t seem to be pressed at all. Also, I can’t tell you how aggravating it was to see balls passed to the center and fall far short of the striker waiting for it.

Time to take over FIFA and change the rules to our liking. Cheerleaders, body checks, and an occassional steroid scandal. Who’s with me?

We need to make a full-throated, all-out commitment to defend our borders, THEN attack. Have Bruce Arenas call Tom Tancredo for the details. :-)

But, Peter, what happened to your "given our talent as a team, combined with the American character, we should advance."? (And before the drones lash out at me as unAmerican or whatever such nonsense, I lost $5 in an office pool on that game, but I didn’t pretend that "American character" would have much to do with the game’s result, one way or another.)

Actually character or "heart" as soccer players would more likely describe it, had everything to do with. The Czechs were very good make no mistake. But we played a heartless game. Playing with heart has been a US charteristic and it has carried them to victory in matches that based on paper, we had no business winning. But we came out and mailed it in.

If it were up to me, Claudio Reina goes to the bench and is replaced by Donovan, and Donavan up top is in turn replaced by Eddie Johnson. Damrcus Beasley gets to watch Clint Dempsey roam the flank as well. And since its the Italians, it may not be enough. But if we play with heart we will not be embarrassed again.

Sheesh, Craig.

Can’t folks talk a little trash before the World Cup? Where’s the fun if folks only talk in measured tones?

So, wait a minute, Mark. Mr. Schramm cites a Kissinger article about soccer and character, then (while claiming not to do so) predicts the U.S. will advance based in part on character. I make reference to the fact that such a high-minded prediction was made, then I get called for taking the game too seriously? Or does it work like this - if the prediction turns out to be correct, then they’re profound and wise in their sports predictions, seeing the bigger picture, etc.; if the prediction turns out to be incorrect, then they were really only "talking trash" in the first place?

I make reference to the fact that such a high-minded prediction was made, then I get called for taking the game too seriously?
>P?No, I’m "calling you out" for taking the trash talk seriously, not the game.


Or does it work like this - if the prediction turns out to be correct, then they’re profound and wise in their sports predictions, seeing the bigger picture, etc.; if the prediction turns out to be incorrect, then they were really only "talking trash" in the first place?
Either you’re unfamiliar with the concept of "trash talk" or you’re being purposefully argumentative. "Trash talk," by it’s nature, depends upon excessive and boisterous rhetoric. The person putting forth the "trash talk" lays all claim to glory and will abandon said talk at the moment of defeat.

So, yeah, cheerleading before the World Cup and drawing on Kissinger as a source of sports wisdom kinda led me to believe it was light on serious study and heavy on, "Let’s get it on!"

Of course, I could be wrong.

Great! That’s the spirit! All the very best for today!
..............keep up the Americans reputation.

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field
 

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://nlt.ashbrook.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/8624