Mike's Extremely Half-Assed EURO Final Preview

With Germany set to face off against Spain, the cliches are out in full force. On one side, the free-flowing, attacking, passionate, hot-blooded, flairful Spaniards nicknamed La Furia Roja or "The Red Fury." In the other corner, the efficient, clinical, efficient, controlling, efficient, aggressive, calculating Germans. Even their nickname, Die Mannschaft is efficient since it only means "The Team."

No doubt the Final, broadcast as part of a doubleheader Sunday after Becks' LA Galaxy visit suddenly-hot DC United, will also be awash in historical allegory. The Germans are looking to cement their fourth EURO title. The Spaniards looking to end decades of choking in major tournaments. Hitler. Franco. Catherine of Aragon. Kaiser Wilhelm. Maximus. Sergeant Schultz. Each of them will be suiting up for their respective sides and will have an influential role to play in the outcome of the game.

As for the game itself, I'm not even going to bother doing a preview. One, because I honestly have no clue who is going to win. Two, because picking soccer games at this level is always a crapshoot. Three, because I am too biased in favor of my one-quarter-countymen, the Germans. Four, even if I weren't, Germany looks better on paper, but the Spanish look like a team of destiny...if not for the fact that they've never been a team of destiny. So while the Spanish may be looking to head Germany their biggest ass-kicking in Austria since the Von Trapps, I gotta go with the Germans.

My call: Germany 3-2. Sorry for wasting your time.

Read more...

Free Tibet? OK. I'll have some.

With the Summer Olympics drawing near, it's time for everyone's favorite pasttime. I'm of course referring to using sport as a metaphor for your country's national history , or in using sport to express your political aims.

Talk has cropped up on a couple of cable new shows speculating on whether the United States will boycott the Olympic Games in Beijing due to recent Chinese crackdowns in Tibet. You may remember Tibet as the country most famous for not being its own country.

Anyone who argues we should boycott the games is spewing pure, total bullshit, and here's why.

1.) Olympic Boycotts accomplish nothing in terms of real, actual foreign policy gains. The United States boycotted the 1980 Summer Olympics in Moscow to protest the USSR's 1979 invasion of Afghanistan. Surprise! It didn't work, and the Soviets remained in Afghanistan for another 10 years. While each US President had their own approach to Containment policy during the Cold War, President Carter's was perhaps the most bizarre. Truman went to Korea, Reagan outspent the Soviets on defense, Nixon opened diplomatic relations with China, LBJ sent troops to Vietnam, and Jimmy Carter said, "You invade Afghanistan? Oh yea? Well guess what, buddy? We're not going to the Olympics! Yea! We got you now! Now you're going to win EVEN MORE gold medals than you usually do!" A boycott of China would accomplish exactly the same. It reeks of the kid who doesn't like the way the game is being played, so he's taking his ball and going home.

If you really want to play the tough love game with China, then take a step that at least LOOKS like it might accomplish something, along the lines of "don't import from them", like the trade embargo we have with Cuba (who has a similar human rights record, but there's apparently no problem with the US National team potentially heading there for World Cup Qualifiers later this year). Loss of trade and commerce with China is really undoable at this point for a variety of reasons, so that is not an option. Fortunately for pols playing to their fanbases, an Olympic boycott would look like we were actually accomplishing something, and many would be too stupid to know the difference .

2.) Unlike the kid who takes his ball home, a boycott will not hurt the Games substantially. In reprisal for the 1980 American-led boycott, the Soviets boycotted the 1984 Summer Games in Los Angeles, and those games are widely considered to be among the best in history. Given the United States' relative standing in the foreign arena right now, I think we can count on even fewer countries to join in the boycott as did in 1980. The Beijing games will be a success.

3.) Don't act all surprised that China reacted swiftly and harshly with a clampdown on Tibetan protestors. Don't be appalled at China's actions just because they are laying the hammer down on Richard Gere's crew. If you're going to be appalled at anything, be appalled at the PRC's human rights record over the past 60 years. The recent transpirings in Tibet is nothing new. China has repressed political freedoms, committed hoardes of human rights abuses over the years, and most unforgivably, has banned Yellow Chair Sports' subversive message from the masses.

4.) A boycott is unfair to the athletes. The United States sends one of the largest delegations to the Olympics every year. Each of these athletes are at the pinnacle of performance, and have spent their entire lives training just to have a chance to compete for a medal and wear their country's colors. Many of these athletes have the Olympics as their sole avenue for glory, as many sports (swimming, track, gymnastics, etc.) are not revenue generating on the level that football, basketball, and baseball are. To have all that work undone possibly by one State Department official announcing an official boycott is the height of unfairness. China will not change its policies as a result. The only people that will get hurt are the athletes.

5.) Plus, a boycott may not even stop the athletes from competing under the Olympic flag (as neutrals), as a number of countries including Australia and Denmark did in 1980. So the end result would be the United States (or any boycotting nation) look like the kid who wants to take their ball and go home.....who leaves the ball on the playground and goes home anyway.

Read more...