From: car@public.BTR.COM (Carlos Rimola-Sarti  car@btr.com)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.soccer
Subject: Re: FIFA propoesed changes to (OCEANIA) Southern America
Date: 21 Aug 92 18:35:06 GMT
Organization: Connective Strategies, Inc. (CSI).  Mountain View, California

In article <16r5phINN4nd@agate.berkeley.edu> 160955r@garnet.berkeley.edu writes:
>In article <7747@public.BTR.COM> car@public.BTR.COM (Carlos Rimola-Sarti  car@btr.com) writes:
>>The tiny nation of Uruguay has always been and still is a power in the
>>the world scene.  They have won two world cups, including the biggest
>>upset in soccer history when they defeated Brasil in the "Maracanazo"
>>final in Brasil in 1950.
>
>I'm not sure about Uruguay's current soccer prowess; at the last world cup
>they were unmercifully taken apart by a rather mundane Belgium in their
>first play-off game. To get there they had to fight South Korea, a team of
>dedicated but clumsy footballers, against whom they scored in the 90th minu-
>te...
>True, Uruguay has a rich soccer tradition, but its last meaningful showing
>in a WC final was against Brazil in 1970. By no means does this qualify them
>as a "power in the world scene"..
>>
>>Countries like Peru and Paraguay and more recently Colombia (no, not
>>Columbia :-) have also had quite respectable appearances in the international
>>scene (read world cups).
>
>Well, I vaguely remember Cubillas' Peru making the playoffs once; and then, in
>Argentina'78 giving 6 goals away against Argentina so that Kempes&Comp could
>make it to the second round...As for Paraguay, I do not think they ever quali-
>fied to the finals in recent history; in addition, they seem to play a cross
>of soccer and tae-kwon-do; I hear that even South American teams are afraid to
>play in Asuncion against "los defensores del chaco"...
>
>Last but not least: Colombia. The way the WC is structured, 66% of the teams
>make it to the second round. Colombia too made it : they tied Germany (el gol
>del milagro), lost to Yugoslavia and defeated a team of tourists from the United
>Arab Emirates.In their first palyoff game they lost: to Cameroon, 1-2.
>
>Now, no matter how partisan you can be, I do not see how you could possibly
>enroll these facts in the service of the argument you made. South America has
>only two teams that do count: Brazil and Argentina. Commonly known facts simply
>do not support the assertion that any other team of that area is of internatio-
>nal caliber...
>
>Cheers!
>
>
>>
>>I suggest you get yourself a good reference book on the history of the game
>>before making any more comments.
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Radu T. Tomescu at UCBerkeley
>Department of Economics


I thought this type of nit-picking, stereotyping and partisanship was 
what you complained about in a previous posting.  Oh well, so much for
consistency..

Let me try to explain again what I tried to convey in my previous posting.
Frankly, I am not going to bother to respond to some of the comments you
make because intentionally or not they are simplistic and stereotypical.
I have no intentions of starting another silly spiral of my team or my
player is better than yours.

The poster to whom I replied had said something along the lines that the
only two important countries in regards to soccer in South-America
were Argentina and Brasil.  Your statements clearly indicate that you
share this view.

One of my points was how can one ignore a country that has won two world
cups when talking about soccer powers?  What's more, I don't think you can 
limit the status of "power" to only those countries that have won a world cup,
where would that leave countries like Holland?  Uruguay as someone else
pointed out is always a contender.  When countries like Brasil and Argentina
play Uruguay, there is always a certain degree of respect (not fear) due
to tradition but also due to strength.  This is not only true of SA
countries but others as well.  I remember back in 1986, before the cup
where Beckenbauer said in an interview that the Dark-Horse of the 
tournament would be Uruguay and he spoke with a lot of respect about the
level of soccer talent coming from this small country.  Of course,
Uruguay did poorly in that WC but my point is that people like 
Beckenbauer appear to show a lot more recognition and respect towards
Uruguay's soccer than you.  

Uruguay's accomplishments are not limited to winning two world cups but
also having done very well in other significant competitions like the
Copa America which they last won in 1985, just a year before Mexico-86
when Brasil and Argentina were quite strong.  The Uruguayan club teams
also have won a good number of Copa Libertadores and Intercontinental
Cups.  BTW, Uruguay's first game in WC90 was against Spain not Belgium.  
They tied Spain after Ruben Soza failed to score on a penalty kick.  I
wouldn't say they fell apart against Belgium.  In the 1st half they had
2  or 3 goals scored against them in quick succession.  However, they
fought hard and dominated in the second half but the Belgians held on
strong.  By the way, I also disagree that Belgium was "rather mundane"
but if you categorize teams only on the basis of having won World Cups
I can understand where this statement comes from.

Of course, in this regard, Europe has only two soccer powers - Germany
and Italy, RIGHT??  I am sure you would leave England out of it as for
you 1966 must be too long ago to be meaningful.  Of course, this would
also have to leave out the eastern-european countries who by these
measures have not accomplished anything!

Please note the sarcasm in the above paragraph.  I don't really believe
this nonsense but it paraphrases the logic which I am objecting to.

The other countries I mentioned, and I forgot to include Chile, have had
an increased share of accomplishments in the last decade, both at the
club level and at the international level.  In fact, it is not unusual
to read assesments in the press (at least the latin-american press)
indicating that the level of play in South-America has "evened out". Still,
Argentina, Brasil and Uruguay are the 3 countries with the best records
and IMHO currently the strongest ones.  However, they can no longer
take countries or teams from Colombia, Chile and Paraguay for granted.
The same applies in other parts of the globe where Mexico is no longer
the dominant power it once was.  IMO, not because its soccer its worse
than before but because the others have gotten better and more competitive.
But this is really another subject..

+---------------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| Carlos Rimola-Sarti                   |         email: rimola@csisdn.com  |
| Connective Strategies Inc.            |                      car@btr.com  |
| ISDN PRI Connectivity Group           |         phone:      415-903-2585  |
+---------------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| "Al compas del cha-cha-cha, del cha-cha-cha del tren..."                  |
+---------------------------------------+-----------------------------------+