India’s only world cup (dis)appearance

India did make it to the world cup, once. Kind of. Well, not really:

No, don’t rub your eyes in disbelief. India did make it to the 1950 World Cup finals. Well sort of. Four countries from Asia were invited to participate in the qualifiers. Burma, Philippines and Indonesia all withdrew, so India qualified automatically.

India was placed in Group 3 with Sweden, Italy, and Paraguay. But their request to play barefoot was turned down by FIFA and they withdrew! [Link]

Sadly, this was back in the hey day of Indian Soccer, too. Until some South Asian team makes it to the world cup, we’ve always got Vikas Dhorasoo and his action figures, right?

164 thoughts on “India’s only world cup (dis)appearance

  1. What a game by Brazil yesterday AND Ronaldo finally woke up!

    I was blown away by Brazil’s performance in the second half. There are few parallels in sports today of something as beautiful, free flowing, effortlessly coordinated as the Brazilian offense. They truly are the master practitioners of the beautiful game and I dont regret watching all 90 minutes of the game on the pirated Chinese website at work 😉

    Some athletes have the ability of elevating their game to a different level altogether and in contemporary sports we have Federer in Tennis, Terrel Owens in Football, Tiger Woods in golf and probably Kobe in Basketball who have similar abilities. But to do this at a team level, is truly remarkable and its always a joy watching the Brazilian masters.

    I wish more Americans would appreciate soccer. The jingoistic attitude of some Americans towards soccer is getting old. I actually got into an argument with a friend yesterday who was mocking soccer because that is supposed to be funny in some circles. The ‘we dont care’ attitude is annoying and if we truly didnt care we would not not spend so much time talking about the fact that ‘we dont care’.

    Anyway, I supported the US team and I am disappointed that we lost. My favorite teams now are Brazil, Spain and Argentina.

  2. Desitude,

    When a rabble of Brits chant “Where’s your army?” in England-Agentina-matches, soccer becomes sanctioned nationalism. And thats pretty darn ugly.

    Agreed, but nothing to do with me or my own stance on these things. I also very much doubt BongBreaker takes that point of view either, or agrees with the thuggery (and occasional racism) driving it.

    You’re also preaching to the converted, considering the hell the (South) Asian community here in the UK went through for a very ong time at the hands of right-wing “British nationalists” (and indeed ordinary white British people who shared those sentiments), although things had improved significantly during the past 10-15 years or so. It still occasionally happens. Not all “indigenous” Brits regard desis as being British, regardless of our citizenship and not even if we were born here.

  3. A bit off-topic from the current discussion that you guys are having here. I’m an Indian citizien…came to US 5 years ago for my graduate studies. Each time I watch a match in which US is playing some other team, I always tend to favour the “other team”. A few of my friends take objection to this ..saying that I should support US (if its not playing against India) instead. This happend quite a few times in this World Cup, Baseball World Championship and Olympics basketball.

  4. What a game by Brazil yesterday AND Ronaldo finally woke up!

    O my god, AMFD, I watch matches a day late (thanks to non-tivo, day late on-demand cable) and I can’t wait to see him make me eat my own words. Last weekend I spent a very drunken hour arguing with this bartender who is big into Ronaldo, he had faith, he saw what was coming. He wasn’t sweating it like me either, just smiling as if he knew a big secret. I need to buy that man a pint.

  5. Siddhartha,

    my primary interest here is seeing great football.

    you think i only support winners? that’s bullshit, bb

    I find these two statements to be contradictory in a way. If you want to see great football, you want to cheer for the best team. In a competition, the term “best team” is the one that plays the best. The one that plays the best is also the winner.

    So you should be supporting winners (that’s what I do) as long as no nefarious methods(steroids etc) have been used to win.

    Sid, I have no problem if you support Brazil because you think that team does justice to the game that you love. But then don’t bring politics in. I could easily quote a few Brazilian political shenanigans that will make the US look good (their callous attitude to the Amazonian forests, decimation of tribes, excessive corruption, out-of-control mafia, HUGE gap between rich and poor, etc etc).

    M. Nam

  6. But then don’t bring politics in.

    why the hell not? i don’t tell you how to forge your esthetic sensibilities. kindly don’t instruct me how to forge mine.

  7. I find these two statements to be contradictory in a way.

    they are not. the winner emerges at the end of the 90 minutes. what bong breaker is talking about is who one comes into the game supporting.

  8. There’s a neat feature in Vanity Fair this mth on a book called Faces of Football, involves a collection of headshots of well-known footballers taken after matches. The only grinning face is Ronaldinho’s and Becks has that Eau de Beckham stare on his face, does that man EVER take a bad picture?

  9. Siddhartha,

    don’t patronize me.

    I don’t know what’s going on with you today but you seem to be determined to pick a fight with someone, first with BongBreaker and now with me. You are misreading and misinterpreting what both of us have said, along with our intentions for doing so. In fact, you are now also being unnecessarily (and, dare I say, uncharacteristically) abrasive towards MoorNam.

    I am a relatively easy-going guy but have a hell of a lot more backbone than you may be assuming and am a very tough opponent indeed if someone starts crossing the line with me without having a genuine reason to do so, regardless of my usual good-humour and occasional jokes on this blog. Whatever opinions you have on this topic (and it’s obviously an emotionally-loaded subject for you) are causing you to unnecessarily — and inappropriately — provoke other people. It may be a good idea to get some fresh air or perhaps take a short break from SM in order to clear your head, before you start becoming even more aggressive towards myself and/or BongBreaker and things really start getting ugly. There is no need for any belligerent machismo here.

    don’t tar me by association. well then. but you sure as hell made the association.

    You made the associate yourself without any need for assistance from me. We have very high-profile, and openly treasonous “khilafat” types here in the UK who openly declare that they have no loyalty towards the United Kingdom at all and that “having a British passport means nothing, it’s just a means to facilitate travel overseas”, and indeed that their aim is to verthrow the current political system and Western culture in this country. They forcefully oppose the very fundamentals of what this country is based on, culturally and politically, and have frankly wreaked havoc on the profile and public perception of pretty much everyone of South Asian origin here because “we all look the same” and unfortunately a disproportionate number of these fanatics are of subcontinental ethnic background. So you will understand if hearing someone voice the same sentiments, practically verbatim, is going to trigger a negative reaction from people such as myself.

    Stating that I am aware you did not intend to come across as someone like one of those jihadist groups is not being “patronising”, it is stating a fact and an attempt towards courtesy towards you so that you (and other people reading SM) do not misinterpret the rest of the associated paragraph. It’s called civilised behaviour, Siddhartha.

    You are of course at liberty to support — or not support — whoever you wish, as we all are. However, it’s important to attempt to understand what the other party is actually saying (and why they are saying it), along with not inflaming the situation further by hypersensitively intepreting their actions as “insulting” or “patronising”.

    Also, my own views on matters such as citizenship, “human first”, human rights, ethical warfare etc should already be abundantly clear considering the number of times I have previously discussed these issues on SM. In that sense, you and I may be on more common ground than you realise, to some extent anyway.

  10. but the bundle called “brazil” has meanings too, even though i’ve never set foot in the place. why should setting foot somewhere be a pre-requisite for supporting them in the world cup?

    I have a co-worker (I should say “had a co-worker” I got laid off 🙁 … )who is Moraccan, but a die-hard fan of Brazil. He had a Brazil flag on his cube, even. And yes !!! no more comments from me commending the great capitalism, I got canned due to it 🙂 (I kid, I kid)

  11. Jai:

    regardless of my usual good-humour and occasional jokes on this blog

    Now come on Jai..”ocassional”. All your posts are hilarious 🙂 ..well except the last one…which seems to be written on a more serious topic.

    Keep the comments coming!

  12. You compare the brother to violent Jihadis, and when he rejects the comparison, you accuse him of belligerent machismo?

    That’s strange, dude. Your comment on 52 makes it obvious that you and Siddhartha are basically on the same (the “righteous”) side of the issue.

    But your words in 59 make it look like you’re the one picking a fight. Jai, try to understand that an emotional attachment to the nation state (to any nation state) is not normative for everyone.

  13. jai, leave out the lectures about what is civilised and what is not. it’s clear to me that you and i have plenty in common, i’ve been reading your comments here as long as you’ve been reading mine, and we’d not even be having this conversation if we didn’t have intellectual respect for each other.

    my response was to bong breaker’s assumption that i — and by extension others here of u.s. citizenship — somehow automatically support the u.s., and therefore that our failure to support the u.s. in the world cup suggests that we only like to support winners. it was a view that called for a response, on numerous levels. one is emotional: those of us here who have considered and complex critiques of the united states government are sensitive, justifiably so i trust you will agree, about people assuming that we support the u.s. in symbolic areas. as you know symbols are very important in political and social life.

    as the conversation progressed, you made comments about patriotism that i disagreed with. so i answered. in addition, you jarringly opened your comment with a classic put-down, that of guilt by association with something that we all agree is abhorrent. then you stepped back and said that of course, of course, you don’t really think that is what i meant, etc. it’s a classic disingenuous tactic and one that can only pollute the conversation.

    now you offer finally some context for your point (as opposed to the cryptic and all-knowning “SM reader in Britain will know” allusion) and that is helpful. but your whole point was diversionary.

    it is rich to read:

    There is no need for any belligerent machismo here.

    from someone who in the previous sentence wrote:

    It may be a good idea to get some fresh air or perhaps take a short break from SM in order to clear your head, before you start becoming even more aggressive towards myself and/or BongBreaker and things really start getting ugly.

    and just before that:

    I am a relatively easy-going guy but have a hell of a lot more backbone than you may be assuming and am a very tough opponent indeed if someone starts crossing the line with me without having a genuine reason to do so

    jai, i haven’t made any assumption about your backbone. as i mentioned earlier, i respect you. now you need to end your sabre rattling, my friend. or don’t. your choice.

    peace

  14. I agree with Sid. I would watch and support a team playing good, attractive football, nationality is important, but i totally can understand if it’s not first on someone’s list on why to support a team ,plus i tend to side the underdogs. So,in the US -Ghana matchup i was hoping for the US to do well, because Ghana was a superior side in my book. It’s complicated people. Sometimes’s i’m not sure and really don’t care which team i’m supporting as long as the game is a real kicker.

  15. Sid writes: >>why the hell not? (bring politics)

    Because it dilutes your own stand. Your support of Brazil due to your love for the game stands on its own merit. By bringing politics in, you give the impression that you hate the US soccer team more than you love the Brazilian team.

    M. Nam

  16. i tend to side the underdogs. So,in the US -Ghana matchup i was hoping for the US to do well, because Ghana was a superior side in my book.

    ?? The US was ranked 5th coming in to the world cup. Nobody expected, at the beginning, that Ghana would advance. Some people predicted that the US would advance. Now things are upside down, but that’s largely b/c the US played horribly, not because it was a weak team.

    Normally I am bemused at the turns a thread takes in the comments. This time I catch myself wishing I had written a post on precisely the issue that Saurav raised and that people are responding to – how do we pick our sporting loyalties? Do we have any obligations to our home teams? etc.

  17. We have very high-profile, and openly treasonous “khilafat” types here in the UK who openly declare that they have no loyalty towards the United Kingdom at all and that “having a British passport means nothing, it’s just a means to facilitate travel overseas”, and indeed that their aim is to verthrow the current political system and Western culture in this country

    Jai, we have enough alarmists in the West. So put the banner of the West down and relax. There is no serious threat to the ‘Western culture’. I think Sid makes a very vaild and perfectly reasonable point. Also suggesting that Sid is making the same argument that is made by HuT/Al-Gharaaba/Al-Muhajiroun is slanderous and pretty ridiculous.

  18. Hi Ennis, i know the US was ranked 5th, but that does not mean that it has a better team. Ghana advancing wasn’t that much of a surprise to many people. They have won a few African cup titles, a couple of under 17 FIFA world championships and their players play in leagues across Europe. I was hoping for a good showing by the US team this year. But who honestly believes that the US football team is the 5th best team right now in the world cup. There a few good players in the team, but the team as a whole appeared to be totally disconnected. So yes, i saw the US as a weaker team in the US-Ghana matchup.

  19. and openly treasonous “khilafat” types here in the UK who openly declare that they have no loyalty towards the United Kingdom at all and that “having a British passport means nothing,

    There is nothing wrong in advocating for a change in the political system of U.K. If you have a problem with their viewpoint, then fight their vision of a UK with a better vision. Calling them treasonous is not an argument. They should be allowed to advocate for replacing the Common Law with the Sharia. As long as they are not using violence or suicide bombings, there is nothing wrong in advocating for a different system as long as they want to achieve it through a democratic process. There is nothing treasonous about advocating for the Sharia.

  20. Siddhartha,

    you jarringly opened your comment with a classic put-down, that of guilt by association with something that we all agree is abhorrent.

    No. You see, this is the whole point, because you are projecting erroneous assumptions about the context of my statements. My comment was not a “put-down”, it was a comment on the need for caution regarding how one phrases such thoughts, as they can indeed be misinterpreted because of various other parties who indulge in the same kind of rhetoric but with more nefarious agendas.

    And before anyone here accuses me of “backtracking”, let me emphasise that I do not engage in that kind of behaviour and, indeed, I have called out certain other SM commenters in the past who attempted the same tactic with me.

    then you stepped back and said that of course, of course, you don’t really think that is what i meant, etc. it’s a classic disingenuous tactic and one that can only pollute the conversation.

    Please refer to my previous paragraph. I do not engage in such “disingenous tactics”.

    now you offer finally some context for your point (as opposed to the cryptic and all-knowning “SM reader in Britain will know” allusion) and that is helpful. but your whole point was diversionary.

    It’s not crypic at all, because Anjem Choudhary is a very well-known figure indeed here in the UK. SM readers in Britain will therefore know exactly the kind of behaviour and mindset I am referrnig to. The link I’ve supplied even includes a video of a debate on the BBC here a few months ago where he basically hangs himself with his own rope. It’s quite a performance.

    as i mentioned earlier, i respect you.
    Good. Normally I respect you too.
    now you need to end your sabre rattling, my friend. or don’t. your choice.

    Sheath your own sword and I’ll sheath mine. I have no problem with politely agreeing to disagree. However, if I think you (or anyone else) is being unnecessarily abrasive towards BongBreaker, MoorNam, or anyone else, I will intervene if I think the situation warrants it. I would act in exactly the same way if it was apparent that someone else was behaving in a similarly unjust and counterproductive manner towards you.

  21. AlMfD,

    Also suggesting that Sid is making the same argument that is made by HuT/Al-Gharaaba/Al-Muhajiroun is slanderous and pretty ridiculous.

    I didn’t. See my previous comments.

    there is nothing wrong in advocating for a different system as long as they want to achieve it through a democratic process. There is nothing treasonous about advocating for the Sharia.

    Abusing the democratic process and its associated freedoms in order to replace it with an undemocractic system with severely curtailed freedoms is both treasonous and hypocritical. Anyway, this is not the right thread to have that argument.

  22. The US was ranked 5th coming in to the world cup. Nobody expected, at the beginning, that Ghana would advance. Some people predicted that the US would advance. Now things are upside down, but that’s largely b/c the US played horribly, not because it was a weak team.

    I was under this impression too, Ennis (though I thought it was something like 11th, not 5th, but anyway…). Sid usefully corrected me by telling me that how you do in your own region inflates your ranking, so that the U.S. and Mexico have higher world rankings than is probably justified by how good their teams are. I think by the time the Ghana-U.S. match rolled around, it wasn’t surprising that Ghana won b/c they had dismantled the Czech team that took apart the U.S. and the other reasons that Derrick stated.

    Of course, if, as media reports allege, they didn’t show up for the czech match and they actually had, well, we might be having a different conversation now.

    Or not 🙂

  23. PS:

    Jai, we have enough alarmists in the West. So put the banner of the West down and relax.

    For the record, at the end of the day my “banner” is that of the Khalsa. In this instance it is entirely compatible with Western ideals and defending the associated freedoms.

    Anyway, off-topic.

  24. I watched both US matches and also the Ghana – Czech Rep match. I think the US team did a much better job against Ghana than the Czech team. I mean in the last 20 some minutes Ghana controlled the ball at will against Czech Rep. US team did a much better job against them. I mean the Brian McBride header that hit the pole??? I commend US team for a good effort. Reyna just might be getting too old. But then next time around US will have the Ghana born Abu Something (cant remember last name). He is some sort of a phenom.

  25. RC:

    Ghanaian born Freddy Adu. We’ll see, he’s still young and quite small. Who knows if he will mature into world cup material?

    Saurav – I’m quoting the ESPN commentators here. They said that the US was 5th coming in, that some people had expected the US to break out of the bracket, but that nobody had expected that of Ghana. While Ghana’s victory was not a surprise, this hardly made the US the “underdog” as some have alleged. In any case, the odds of Ghana’s victory were just 6:5, so nearly even odds, again, hardly the dominant favorites even going into the game.

  26. When terms like “the righteous” start getting thrown around I get nervous :)…after all, ‘righteousness’ is precisely what both Sharia and its detractors would invoke.

  27. Ghana advancing wasn’t that much of a surprise to many people. They have won a few African cup titles, a couple of under 17 FIFA world championships and their players play in leagues across Europe.

    i think this is something that has changed the Cup itself, since players from smaller countries are much less intimidated by the big nations now days.

    i think the point about the narrative being driven by the big nations in soccer is a good one. Its one of the reasons Beckham is so big even though, he’s world class in just one thing, which he does well. Its the reason I root for Liverpool if I root at all for a Premiership team, if I root at all for a soccer club team. I just don’t know enough about the rest of the world in terms of soccer. I also instinctively feel soccer and the World Cup is a beautiful game because its a mingling of the aspirations of people in groups. People in groups can be glorious or they can be profane. The Cup is a chance for us to all be glorious for a time, if possible. Its why racism in soccer wounds more deeply. Its why the motto of this Cup is something like “a time to make friends”. I frankly am distressed only that its wink wink nod nod at all the prostitution coming into Germany for the Cup.

    supporting a club or nation is a joy, its one of the joys of the time…..we all feel a little more in the driver’s seat of our lives. I may be passionate for the cause of justice, but will I see that passion through with a cheer on a day to day level? Only if Senegal comes from an underdog seat to play like champions and proclaim their dignity. And so when we cheer for a nation in the Cup, we are cheering often for a dream. And at that point I think the most well-taken sentiment is to respect the dream that other men and women hold dear if possible

    I support the US because i dream of a place of soaring humanism breaking past wounds, a place where contradictions give way to the possibility of rough hewn humanity. A place of Walt Whitman, even though Whitman himself can not be taken whole

    Anyway, a thread on the beautiful game and maybe a try at saying something with beauty in it

    Personally I’m still looking for my Senegal

  28. Saurav – I’m quoting the ESPN commentators here. They said that the US was 5th coming in, that some people had expected the US to break out of the bracket, but that nobody had expected that of Ghana. While Ghana’s victory was not a surprise, this hardly made the US the “underdog” as some have alleged. In any case, the odds of Ghana’s victory were just 6:5, so nearly even odds, again, hardly the dominant favorites even going into the game.

    All this sturm und drang for who most deserves the privilege of getting demolished by Brazil 🙂 Anyway, your points are fair, though I would add though that ESPN continues to prove that its commentary could have used some work 🙂

  29. This needs to be explored by Mutineer bloggers:

    The head of the US Soccer Federation (essentially, the American FA) is a chap named Sunil Gulati. Whoa.

    HAMBURG, Germany (AP) — Bruce Arena sounded more like a man ready to say goodbye than a coach eager to sign on for another World Cup. He was noncommittal after the Americans were knocked out in the 2002 quarterfinals, too, though he said then he was open to staying on and eventually agreed to a new four-year. On Friday, he spoke in the past tense and showed little eagerness to stay. “Four years ago I was completely burnt out after that whole thing. I was a zombie for about two weeks,” he said. “Right now, I’m just an idiot.” There was no glory for the Americans this year. After the United States was eliminated in the first round with a 2-1 loss to Ghana on Thursday, Arena spoke with U.S. Soccer Federation president Sunil Gulati, and the pair said it was far too early to make any decisions on whether Arena should stick around — or even wants to remain — for four more years.

    Whoa. Comes as a surprise to me. Further investigation is needed (by somebody else) as I am too lazy.

  30. So this is the lineup with my predictions. Any surprises would be great

    Round of 16 Ger vs Swe, Arg vs Mex, Eng vs Ecu, Por vs Ned, Swi vs Ukr, Ita vs Aus, Bra vs Gha, Spn vs Fra

    Quarters (prediction/hope 🙂 ) Ger vs Arg, Eng vs Ned, Swi vs Ita, Bra vs Spn

    Semis: Ger vs Eng, Bra vs Ita

    Finale: Ger vs Bra

    Predicted winner: Ger

  31. The head of the US Soccer Federation (essentially, the American FA) is a chap named Sunil Gulati. Whoa.

    Covered here

  32. Hey, sorry I missed all this and apologies if I was the one that started it! Sid, dude I really hope I didn’t cause offence. I was just trying to be a bit inflammatory and provoke a reaction – sorry man. Thank you for replying at length, it’s given me a lot to think about. I hope you get where I was coming from. Peace bro.

    But I find it amusing the World Cup does bring out these sorts of issues. In fact last night at a pub next to the High Court in London I got in a debate about this very thing with some high-powered barristers and the barmaid. The white barmaid and one of the white lawyers said anyone can support any team they like and my British Pakistani friend and another white lawyer said that if you’re living in England you must support England.

    Where do I stand? I don’t know anymore! My support remains unchanged, but I understand others’ views more succinctly now. I also wonder…if the country that played the most beautiful footie was North Korea or an equivalent, how would the world view them?

  33. Here’s something you might like Sid, something I was going to blog about myself, was Gary Younge’s column in the Guardian everyday. The ‘ethical world cup’. It’s quite an amusing read. Here’s his entry about England vs. Ecuador:

    “Socialists should desire the defeat of their own sides,” argued Lenin. True, he was talking about imperialist war rather than football. True also, it went down better at the barricades than it would on the terraces. But we could learn a thing or two from the Ecuadoreans. When they elected a leader who promised progressive reforms and then hammered the poor and cosied up to the US, they took to the streets and kicked him out. In a contest between a country offering uncritical support to the world’s sole superpower and one where the poorest are actively resisting it, the ethical choice is clear – even when it’s uncomfortable. Verdict: Yes, it’s Ecuador!
  34. Saurav’s point of loyalty is an interesting study in diasporic culture and identity. I am surprised no one brought up Norman Tebbit’s “cricket test” of national loyalty up yet. The premise of the test is simply that those that are not ethnically English must be asked who they would support in an English cricket match — and those that would support the English team are indeed British irrespective of their genetic makeup, and vice versa.

    The Guardian has an interesting article about the possibility of patriotism that is different from ‘football patriotism’ where the author claims that Tebbit’s cricket test is the outcome of a primitive ‘tribal’ interpretation of partiotism.

    For the record, this Indian loves the Brazilian team. And that’s simply because they are gonna win. And they’ll do it beautifully.

  35. beautiful brazilians…

    yeah i second that. as someone who lives in a rugby-loving country which produces cauliflower-eared men with permanently concussed expressions on their faces, I LOVE that soccer has the ability to make even the sports-haters/ambivalent so v interested.

    no wonder it’s called the beautiful game. sigh…wish it was world cup year every year! and maybe one day in 10000 years when we’re an important enough country we’ll get to host it…

  36. I didn’t really want to mention the Tebbit Test DDiG cos I get a bit sick of it, as you can imagine it crops up frequently in discussion here. Tashie if the Cup was every year…it wouldn’t be so special 🙂

  37. I came across this site while doing a search on…you guessed it, Vikash Dhorasoo! As a “desi” (we don’t usually use that term) of Trini nationality, I will say there are no desis on the national team, although there are guys of Indian background in the country who certainly play the game. I guess they are not good enough to qualify for the national team. And yes, desi Trinis were definitely rooting for our national team, despite zero representation from individuals of our ethnic background. It was a very unifying period for citizens of Trinidad and Tobago.

  38. I didn’t read the whole comment list, but I’d like to point out that supporting England would be the opposite of diasporic unity. Instead, you should do what I do, and cheer for every other country to beat the highly overrated English team.

  39. Francia 1 – Brazil 0 !!!! Great match. I think France played better than Brazil all-around. My prediction France the winners of “Copa Mundial De La FIFA, Alemania” (or just “World Cup, Germany”) !!!

  40. Ennis, I am picking Germany to pull thru’ on Tuesday against Italy. Although the game that Germany beat Argentina, I thought Argentina would win. Argentina were quicker and I think had possesion of the ball longer but Germany scored and then beat them in penalties (los penales 🙂 ) thats why I feel that Germany will go to the finals.

  41. Ennis, Give us your pick. So we have so far myself for Germany and KT for Italy. Lets see what happens on Tuesday

  42. I am going a step further that France will be the World Cup Champs in Italy-France finals.

    If people like Zidane and Henry click. But then Italy might have a new “Paulo Rossi” round the corner.

    Don’t get me wrong, I have always been admirer of Brazil and their fans.

  43. My pick? Germany. Probably in ET but not in PK (if it gets to PK, Italy is toast). And then … France, but Germany will make it hard and might pull it out.