I was fortunate enough to have the opportunity to catch up with Luke Wilkshire of Dynamo Moscow and the Socceroos on Tuesday near Dynamo’s training base in Khimki on the outskirts of Moscow. Luke was kind enough to wait for me as Google Maps uncharacteristically led me in the wrong direction on my trek out there and, upon my arrival, I proceeded to make an arse of myself as I struggled to operate the hi-tech dictaphone I borrowed from my law firm. Many thanks to Luke and his agent, Darren Jackson of Inspire Sports Management, for agreeing to the interview and for being so generous with their time and to my current employers, Linklaters, for allowing me to use their dictaphone and to take the afternoon off to go meet Luke.

The full transcript of the interview is set out below:

SB Tang (“SBT”): World Cup 2010. First, congratulations on a great performance. We finished level on points with Ghana in a group also containing Germany and Serbia. Just going back to that opening match against Germany. How did the players feel about the way that we were tactically set up — was there any frustration after the result?

Luke Wilkshire (“LW”): No, of course, there was frustration and disappointment — we lost 4-0 in the opening game. We thought that we can do a lot better than that and we can. Had we played at our full potential, I’m sure we would have gotten a better result. But, you know, it is what it is. That’s football. It doesn’t always go to plan. And it was a bad night for the Socceroos that night.

SBT: But to us at home, it actually seemed that the lads played pretty well, but the tactics …

LW: I think I’d say that a lot of people back home can sit on their sofas and see things and make their own judgments and opinions on things. The players were comfortable knowing that we played the system that we played. We knew our jobs, but we didn’t stick to it. The early goal rattled us a little bit. I think that did shake us because we had started the game reasonably well — we had a couple of good chances. But, I mean, I wouldn’t talk tactically. Pim did a great job with us. Everyone knew our roles. We qualified for the World Cup with an amazing record so I don’t think that [ie tactics] is any kind of excuse at all.

SBT: In the second phase of Asian qualification we didn’t concede a goal in a live match so …

LW: Yeah, you know, we learnt a lot under Pim. How to perform, not just in one-off games, but over the course of many games and that’s what it’s about. Going away to difficult places in Asia and to be able to get a result like we did. It took a lot of tactics. Very smart play. And, I think, Pim guided us very well through that.

SBT: Second game against Ghana. Going a goal up early, then went down to 10 men later in the first half courtesy of some strange referring. But full credit to you guys, you bossed the game with 10 men and the score at 1-1, particularly in the second half, and you played a big, big part in that. You swung in a great cross for Scott Chipperfield who headed over seconds after coming on as a sub. And you had that shot saved when you were one-on-one with the keeper. I have to ask — do you still think about that shot?

LW: Nah, only when someone mentions it — obviously I try not to!

SBT: Yeah, sorry!

LW: That’s alright, there goes my confidence for the weekend’s game. I’ll boot it up next month!

SBT: But I think The Australian, The Age and The World Game said that you were the man of the match so …

LW: Yeah, we played well — the response from the players was brilliant as you’d expect from our team and as we expect from each other. It was disappointing, the result, obviously. We didn’t have a great deal of luck throughout the whole World Cup in regard to decisions. Sometimes, you need a little of luck, especially at the top level, you need a break every now and then. And we didn’t get it. Again, that’s football, you gotta get on with it.

SBT: I was in London at the time and I think the word used by all the London papers after that match was “brave”.

LW: Yeah, you’re playing for your country and it’s about making Australia proud. You want to make Australia proud — you’re there to represent your country. And I think all the Australian people I know, the people in the stadium were very proud and felt good about it — as did we, and that’s the main thing for us.

SBT: Well, you definitely did [do us proud], because the third game against Serbia, I was in a pub with a bunch of Australians at Wimbledon. We’d just stopped watching that marathon Mahut-Eisner match and we went out to a pub to watch you guys. We were going mental after you swung in a great cross from the right for Timmy Cahill to head home then Brett Holman put us 2-0 up with a screamer from 30 yards. At that stage, did you guys believe?

LW: Yeah, of course, we went into the game believing. There’s no point going on the pitch if you don’t believe that you can get a good result — of course we did. We knew it was going to be tough. We knew we were up against it but of course we believed. There’s just no point playing the game if you don’t believe.

SBT: It was a brilliant cross for that first goal by Timmy Cahill by … yourself …

LW: Yeah … I regularly make him look good!

SBT: Yeah, surely by this stage, that’s a rehearsed training ground move for us isn’t it — the cross to Timmy Cahill?

LW: Yeah, you gotta play to your strengths don’t ya — Timmy can’t kick a ball so put it on his head! Haha, you know, jokes aside, he’s great in the air. That’s our strength. Same with Joshua Kennedy when he’s there playing up front. You want to be getting crosses in because that’s gonna cause problems and there’s where we’re going to get goals.

SBT: I seem to remember that Timmy was being marked by Vidic in that match who’s meant to be one of the best aerial defenders in the world …

LW: Ah well, he can’t quite jump like Timmy!

SBT: Following the World Cup, Holger Osieck’s taken over from Pim Verbeek as Socceroos manager. Are you enjoying his slightly different, perhaps more attacking style of play?

LW: Ah, you know, look it’s still early stages since the new boss has come in. The players are starting to understand and get to grips with what he’s after. We’ve had some decent results in the beginning, aside from that Egypt game which was reasonably poor but that’s something for us to learn from. I must say that it was sad to see Pim go. I think everybody really enjoyed their time playing under him. But it’s a new era, it’s a new time and we hope for positive times under the new boss.

SBT: You mentioned the Egypt game. Firstly, nice block — you can’t do much about rebounds! But as it was just a friendly, was Osieck’s focus maybe more on the performance rather than the result in the lead-up to a big tournament in the Asian Cup?

LW: It’s a habit of winning. You want to be in the habit of winning. You always wanna win. Of course, performance is also important. But it was a good game for us to have — they’re a very good team. Difficult circumstances with players coming in 24 hours, 48 hours before a game. It’s always difficult, but like I say, it’s a disappointing result and it’s one that we put behind us now and we try to learn from it. I’m sure we’ll be evaluating it when we meet up before the Asian Cup. And then we move on because we got a big month of football coming up in January.

SBT: You mentioned the Asian Cup coming up in January — what’s the target for the boys?

LW: Look, we’re ranked number 1 in Asia and for a reason, you know, so expectations are going to be there again with the team. Rightly so but, ultimately, it’s down to us to go and make sure we perform to our level and if we do that then I think we can have a very successful tournament.

SBT: We’ve been grouped with India, Bahrain and Korea — so I’m presuming that Holger Osieck’s already given Carl Valeri a poster of Ji-Sung Park with a giant target sign painted over his head?

LW: Aaah, I don’t know about that!

SBT: Looking even further ahead to the 2014 World Cup in Brazil. By then, most of the Golden Generation who formed the core of the 2006 and 2010 World Cup squads will be in their mid-30s. Timmy Cahill will be 34. Harry Kewell will be 35. You, on the other hand, will be a relatively sprightly 32. Looking at the XI who started against Japan in 2006, you may be the only one left — does that worry you at all?

LW: No, not really, of course, you know, that’s football — players retire and move on. Hopefully, between now and then, there’s going to be a lot of football played. There’s hopefully going to be a few more of the young up-and-coming players to really come and put a foothold in and try and challenge for spots in the team because it’s important. We’ve got a few at the moment, that have the talent, that are promising but there’s a big difference between a bit of talent and promising to being able to hold down a spot in the national team and to be able to perform at the top level.

SBT: You mentioned promising young players — the name on everyone’s lips right now is Tommy Oar. Have you had the chance to train and play much alongside him?

LW: Yeah, I’ve seen a bit of Tommy. He’s been in camp a few times. He’s definitely one — he’s definitely got a lot of talent and potential there. It’s up to him to take that talent and potential and to be able to develop into a real top player who can perform not only at international level but at club level first of all, to hold down a spot at his club, Utrecht, to be playing before you can expect him to step up into the national team and start performing on the world stage.

SBT: You mentioned those younger guys coming through, will you be looking to take on more of a leadership role with them both on and off the pitch as one of the senior guys?

LW: Nothing really changes for me — I’ve been around a long time now. It feels longer than it actually is! The team’s always good together and everyone helps everyone along, especially us older players with some of the young boys. It’s up to them as well, they’ve gotta be wanting to learn and to see and to take on things from the older boys.

SBT: Growing up in Wollongong, did you ever think that you’d be sitting in Moscow discussing representing Australia in a third successive World Cup?

LW: Nah, definitely not. I didn’t expect half the things that have happened in my life — you dream about it, but you don’t necessarily believe that they’re going to come true. But fortunately enough for me, it came true, and through a lot of hard work and determination and sacrifice, I can now say that I’ve been and done quite a bit of it. Hopefully, the journey’s still got a few more years left in it!

SBT: You mentioned hard work and sacrifice. When you first went to Europe, you went to Boro and then you moved to Bristol City in search of first-team action. They were then in the third-tier of English football. That’s maybe not the most obvious place to discover an international class footballer. So how did Guus discover you for the 2006 World Cup? Did he send out Johan Neeskens to watch you at Bristol City?  

LW: Nah, I mean obviously when he took over the national team I’d been around the national team already, not playing so much but I’d been in a lot of camps under Frank Farina and Graham Arnold. And then when Guus took over, in the first games, he wanted everybody, he wanted about 30 players — anyone who’d been involved in the national team he wanted to see for himself. He made his opinions based on what he saw with his own eyes in training camps and things, and that’s where I got my opportunity because he thought that I adapted and that I fitted well into the team structure.

SBT: And you really built on that, after the 2006 World Cup you moved to FC Twente in the Dutch Eredivisie. You had a brilliant 2 year stint with them — you helped them qualify for the Champions League for the first time in their history. How did that come about — moving to a club like Twente?

LW: Yeah, that was through Guus as well. He had a contact, a coach who was at Twente at the time, Fred Rutten — that made a good opening for me. It was ideal for me at the time. I had a great two years there. I still have many good friends there. It’s a great club. I really enjoyed my football there, there’s no doubt about it.

SBT: You must’ve been stoked for them when they won the Dutch title?

LW: Yeah, I was delighted for them. Like I said, I’ve got really good friends there who I still keep in touch with and see regularly. So I was really happy for them. I’ve often been asked if I wanna go back there, they’d like to bring me back. You know, maybe one day I’ll go and say hello to them again!

SBT: Yeah, they’re doing very well for themselves. They’re in the Champions League again this season. Just going back to Wollongong, did you and Scott Chipperfield know each other growing up in Wollongong?

LW: Nah, not until meeting up in the Socceroos.

SBT: Arsene Wenger has said that technical ability can only be acquired before a player hits their mid-teens. How and where did you and Scott Chipperfield, two of our most successful players, acquire your technical ability — are there secret underground futsal pitches in Wollongong?

LW: Ah, nah, I guess, the little bit of technique that I do have I got from my backyard with my brother. Haha, that shows how I little I got — nah, you know, I did a lot of work in the backyard with my brother!

SBT: I heard you being interviewed a few weeks ago by Russia Today about our chances of hosting the 2022 World Cup. How do you rate our chances given that we’ll be up against USA?

LW: Yeah, I think we’ve got as good a chance as anyone. We’ve got everything that anyone could want to host the World Cup. Our nation — the facilities, the people, the climate, everything’s there with the structure. I think it’d be fantastic for Australian football, for the Australian people to be able to host it. I think it’d be fantastic for the world of football for everyone to be able to come Down Under and experience a World Cup in Australia. Fingers crossed we get a good decision.

SBT: Yeah, shame about the time zone though.

LW: Yeah, compared to Europe the time zone’s not great, but to Asia it’s good. You can look at it in many different ways. I’m sure the FFA’s done everything they possibly can. Mr Lowy’s put his heart and soul into it and I really, really pray that we get a good decision.  

SBT: Yeah, I think the preliminary reports came back and we got graded really highly so touch wood.

LW: Yeah, like I say, it’d be a massive thing.

SBT: Final question — any plans to head home to the A-league in the distant, distant future, maybe even to a new Wollongong-based A-league team?

LW: Ah, who knows, at the moment, I’m here at Dynamo. I’ve still got a contract here at Dynamo for a few more years and I’m not really looking beyond that. I’m very happy here. And what comes after that, time will tell.

SBT: Thanks very much for your time.

LW: No worries. 

Dunga handed in his resignation immediately following the 2-1 loss to the Netherlands, citing that the blame was “his and everybody else’s”

To some extent, he was right. If, by “everybody else,” he meant Felipe Melo. And to a lesser extent, Julio César, trumped as one of the best keepers in the World Cup despite not having to do anything in the whole tournament, and failing the one time it mattered.

1. Melo’s case is more clear-cut as a reason for this shocking loss: his pass created the 1-0 as the Dutch defense failed to show up; his incisive pass, which a good defense would never have allowed, gave Robinho a cakewalk for the opening goal.

However, a long ball into the box in the second half showed a tactically unaware Melo, who impeded his own keeper (who probably should have called him off anyways) and headed into his own net. The worst was yet to come. When Brazil were down 2-1, his stupid and deplorable stomp on Arjen Robben deprived Brazil of an even handed contest.

Obviously frustrated, Melo had been the victim of numerous fouls, which brings me to a second point:

2. The Japanese referee, Yuichi Nishimura, was inconsistent in controlling the match. Moments before being sent off, Melo received a particularly brutal hack from behind from Mark Van Bommel. Amazingly, Van Bommel was fouling with virtual impunity throughout the second half, and in my neutral eyes could have gotten at least 3 clear-cut yellow cards.

It was a mystery to those watching that, for example, Michel Bastos would receive a yellow for persistent fouling, yet Van Bommel, fouling even more flagrantly and frequently, escaped booking.

Of course, none of these are excuses for Felipe Melo’s temper-tantrum and dirty kick. This side of Melo was obvious against Portugal, though in that case Dunga subbed him off before he could do himself (or an unfortunate Portuguese player) more damage.

3. This brings us to the third key in this self-destruction of the Brazilian team: Dunga. It is simple to see that in this specific match, he was all wrong in his changes; he really should have seen Felipe Melo, already visibly frustrated, off when they were drawing 1-1. Taking off Michel Bastos gave the Dutch loads of space to exploit on that side of the field, freeing them from his incursions down their own right channel.

Secondly, taking off Luis Fabiano and introducing Nilmar did not make much sense when they were 2-1 down. A forward-for-forward swap only makes sense when you are winning or drawing a very tight game in which a forward is seriously not functioning.

This last swap demonstrates one of Dunga’s biggest mistakes in the end: a lack of attacking and creative depth in the squad.

With the 1-0, Brazil did not dominate as they should have; their team was set up to play against a team that would attack them in the manner of Chile. In contrast with Spain, who held a masterclass of how to play with a 1-0 against Portugal, they were unable to keep meaningful possession. Unlike Argentina, who when winning 1-0 against Mexico went for the jugular, they lacked ideas and incisiveness when leading.

When tied 1-1, even more when they were losing, there was no go-to player that could come in and make an impact. This lack of an impact sub drastically limited the tactical options of the Brazilians. The conservative double-holding formation anchored by Melo and Gilberto Silva makes sense in a tight match in which limiting the opponents options takes precedence over creating chances.  Counterattacking is essential in such a system.

But when Brazil were desperately needing a goal, they had to take more risks, and simply did not have the resources to create them. Robinho and Kaká were exposed in a poor performance from both of them; by the time Holland scored, their defense showed itself to be more than apt in 1-on-1 situations, man marking tightly and pressuring the creators every time they had a touch. As a result, there were no options for either of them, and Luis Fabiano received no supply whatsoever all game.

At this point, Dunga’s great flaw of not calling up more attacking players is glaringly obvious. There was much controversy in Brazil at the repeated omission of players such as Juventus’s Diego, a brilliant midfield orchestrator; Alexandre Pato, who was injured until late April, yet still is a brilliant and irrepresible forward; and the old dog Ronaldinho, whose experience and vision might have changed things for Brazil.

And this is still overlooking attackers such as Hulk, who has been absolutely outstanding for Porto in the last couple edition of the Champions’ League.

For a time, these failings on Dunga’s part were overlooked. The world, and Brazilian fans, seemed ready to overlook the increasingly distant ideals of jogo bonito (which the British press, no doubt swayed by Nike, have perverted to Joga Bonito) in favor of a physical, low-risk battling squad.

In the end, the abandonment of jogo bonito was more than risky: it was disastrous. Dunga, and Brazil’s, negation of their stereotypically skillfull and swashbuckling game was a practical and tactical error too large to overcome against a rather fortunate Dutch side.

As Spain prepares to take on Switzerland on Wednesday, the world is abuzz with anticipation.

Not only are Spain joint favorites with Brazil, but the tournament needs the Spanish team like a fish needs water. After one of the drabbest opening rounds in memory, fans everywhere are looking for reasons as to why things are so awful this time round. The long European season, the austral winter, the security concerns and the stress it creates, the ultra-defensive attitudes, and the worst ball in history that was still round: the Jabulani. Thanks, adidas, for a World Cup with no shots on goal.

The prospect of the Spanish team being true to its image, thus, serves as a necessary riposte from the otherwise disappointing level of play seen so far. The Spaniards seem to be on the rise, even considering their incredible record winning and unbeaten streaks, as well as their scintillating win at Euro 2008.

Having seen the Brazilians struggle to beat North Korea 2-1, the Spanish side brings a promise of a real jogo bonito. The coach, Vicente del Bosque, seems more than likely to be faithful to their image of artful prodigies of world football. Despite coming off the success of 2008, the 2010 squad is one that is still tremendously youthful and not bound to the stereotypical cynicism associated with defending champs who refuse to sacrifice anything in their bid to retain. With enough talent to build two squads, it is easy to forget that Spanish football itself is defined by its strict divisions, often with its bitter political roots.

In the case of this current squad, there is a strong base along the Real Madrid-Barcelona line, with as many as 9 starters featuring from these two banner teams. At the same time, there is also a significant infusion from other Spanish teams such as Athletic Bilbao and Sevilla, not to mention the small but brilliant British contingent in Torres and Fabregas. It is a team filled with Catalans and madrileños, with Basques from Guipúzcoa and Vizcaya, with stars from La Mancha and the Canary Islands.

This diversity of linguistic-ethnic groups has long been associated with an underperformance of the Spanish national team at big tournaments. However, Euro 2008 showcased a side that seemed to be driven much more by professional, global ambition, than by regional differentiation. The team was able to assembe around a single footballing language that made sense not only to them, but to the world.

Laurent Dubois, an avid football fan and historian at Duke University, speaks about the idea of football and the French empire in the 20th century, his study Soccer Empire: The World Cup and the Future of France culminating with a discussion of the impact of the World Cup triumph of 1998 on society and politics. Among other things, the triumph (and the run) of the epic ‘98 French team generated a maelstrom of political and social debate that went down to the bone of French identity.

The fact that the team was composed of an unprecedented mix of ethnic backgrounds, mostly descending from the French colonies, was a source of contention during their famous run. At the same time, the French victory created a platform for unification, in which the idea of France gloriously embraced post-colonial realities. A once homogeneous identity became multicolored, and under its figurehead Zinedine Zidane, son of Algerian immigrants, realized the possibilities of a truly race-less society.

And yet, Soccer Empire also brings up the question of how long such a feelgood moment lasts before society reverts to its previous patterns, moving on to other, perhaps more immediate concerns.

In the Spanish case, it would be fascinating to see how the politics of autonomous communites play out alongside the progress of the national team. What would happen to the vociferously separatist contingents from the Basque Country and Catalonia? More importantly, what would happen in terms of the public opinion of the masses who follow football, whose opinions are not always represented by their most vocal politicians even in areas with anti-Spanish nationalist ambitions?

Unification seems like a naïve ideal, especially in the context of what many will consider merely a sport, a diversion. Nonetheless, one cannot negate the reality that this sport is a phenomenon resulting from innumberable cultural conditions, and is an important part of the social fabric, occupying not just stadiums, but imaginations and everything that derives from that. Ideas about masculinty, sex, discipline, beauty, violence, and so forth, pass through and are perpetuated by the global game.

For the Spanish team, while we cannot predict the impact they will have on politics and society in general in Spain should they do well, we can certainly know for sure that a deep Spanish run will certainly bring the footballing public a great deal of joy.

7.  (rejected by the editors) Group of [Literal] Death. Much like the traditional group of death, only actual death is the feature. The teams in this group will compete for the Ultimate Prize: human life.

8. Star Ball. Much like the famous “star” token in Super Mario Brothers, this addition to the game would grant superpowers to the attacking player with the ball, via an instant injection of sugar, caffeine, and fast-action steroids. In addition to additional power, endurance, and speed, the player receiving the Star Ball would also be granted absolute impunity for 35 seconds.

9. Pro Wrestling-Style Pitch Invasions. Taking a cue from WWF, this update to the legendary FIFA rulebook would open up a multitude of possibilities, including but not limited to: players from one team invading a match in which other rivals are playing, and scoring against their principal enemies; masked player wearing the number “0″ suddenly joining in the action to sabatoge a boring deadlock; players’ wives doing things such as tripping their enemies during counterattacks. Could also lead to other wrestling-style innovations, such as getting FIFA administrators involved in the story line (for example, Maradona bitch-slapping Sepp Blatter after gate-crashing the opening ceremony).

10. Opening Kick–for Keeps. In an attempt to pander to the American market, FIFA introduces an opening penalty kick taken by a head of state or other celebrity or dignitary. Each half begins with a penalty kick from a randomly chosen world leader or reality television star, with the resulting goal counting.

11. BabyCup. Since their are little kids out on the pitch lining up with the teams anyways, why not let them play against each other as well? This mini-Cup would attract sponsors as well as finally attract the elusive soccer-Mom market in the United States.

12. GreenCup. For World Cups played in wealthy Western nations, the GreenCup rule will allow players from less wealthy nations to earn GreenCards or other forms of permanent residency depending on how well they perform. This update to the format would ensure that this small-team attitude of “for us, making it this far is like winning” is abolished.

South Korea vs. Greece: The National Anthem Battle

Sadly, this has become the first Anthem DeathMatch that I’ve missed, due to my inability to wake up at 7:30 in the morning. Is it safe to call it a draw?

The Match

The visual clarity of the first World Cup™ I’ve seen in HD™ has led this display of football to be infinitely more painful than one could ever imagine. What does the future have in store for technologically enhanced sub-par entertainment?

The tie featured the Greek Neo-Classical style of football: perplexing length, enigmatic presentation (will they ever connect more than 2 passes?), and very tall players, all the while asking ominously profound questions of our ability to tolerate their style). It’s a repeat of 2004’s ultra-defensive and counterattacking side, only not very good at defense, and unable to actually counterattack.

Meanwhile, South Korea copes with its second straight World Cup without direct referee assitance. Their last World Cup began with an encouraging defeat of Togo, a draw with France, but a defeat to Alpine Powerhouse Switzerland that ensured currywurst would be their only World Cup consolation. They stay true to their style of massive capitalist production, but struggle to match the quality of the products they are competing with.

Nonetheless, the Greeks out-dismal the Koreans for a 2-0 final score in favor of the South Korea. To quote Scott Murray of the Guardian: “Though I didn’t think they’d have any chance of out-haplessing their 1994 squad, and they’re giving that a good go.”

Politically Correct Picks: South Korea vs. Greece

At first glance, a winner seems clear; the Greek way, once one of wisdom and intellect, has become one of overspending and shambolic recovery efforts, helping to plunge their neighbors into monetary uncertainty. Not to mention widespread accusations of state police brutality during the revolts in Athens in the past couple of years. Just when the Koreans appear set to win, an own-goal pops out of nowhere: the Korean animal rights issue (dog-b-q, anyone? not to mention all the YouTubes out there of Koreans serving still-alive animals) jumps into the forefront, hitting Western civilization where it most hurts: right in the puppies. Result: a draw.

One week last February, potential members of the English national football team took us through a highly maudlin, yet entertaining, narrative arc. John Terry – England’s then captain – tacitly admitted to cheating on his wife with, feasible World Cup teammate, Wayne Bridge’s girlfriend. Bridge, in turn very publicly denied Terry a handshake at the beginning of a match between their two club teams, Man City and Chelsea, presumably communicating a message of “thanks but no thanks” to a position alongside Terry on the World Cup squad to English trainer Fabio Capello. And Ryan Shawcross of Sunderland cried on the pitch after breaking the leg of young Arsenal hopeful, Aaron Ramsey, the day before he, himself, was to be named as Bridge’s replacement on the national team. All the while, a slight, well-dressed, Portuguese man was preparing to go to London, where he would beat up on a team that he admitted to being his own and then, post-match, would make vague claims about being “the chosen one”.

Few could argue that things in football’s home country have not gotten weird. Even fewer could argue  with the fact that we are finding ways to entertain, and communicate with, ourselves through this medium that span well beyond the importance of the final score of a match or the current standings in league tables.

While the common perception of popular narrative’s evolution is that it shifted from oral culture to the written word with the invention of the Gutenberg Press and the later massification of literacy, and from the written word to new media with the popularization of the Internet and digital mediums, this column will create a forum for articles that point to football as a simultaneous medium of all of the above, as we preserve, and entertain ourselves with, classic, massive, and ludic tropes and themes through the global game.

As the world prepares for what may be considered the most cosmopolitan World Cup in the tournament’s 80-year history, to be hosted by South Africa from mid-June to mid-July, no shortage of praise has been heaped upon the international game as a bellwether for better times.

The game’s political supporters are not without their strong points, and the fact that Africa will host its first ever tournament as a hopeful sign of the continent’s development may have some validity.  Many of the Premiership’s stars from the league’s strongest teams, themselves powerful international brands, are African.  With the Premiership providing a tight race atop the tables in the midseason, everyone is scratching their heads, wondering what will happen to the league’s most successful teams as they attempt to make do without stars such as Didier Drogba, Kolo Toure, Salomon Kalou, Emmanuel Adebayor and Alex Song as they return to Africa to represent their countries in the African Cup of Nations.  Fans wait with bated breath to see if Chelsea will maintain its narrow lead in the tables without Drogba, arguably the league’s most virtuosic scorer, and how Arsenal will cope without its key African players on the back line.  Indeed, with the departure of African players from the Premiership in the middle of the season, there is a departure, in part, of the Premiership itself.

Bono was quick to pick up on Africa’s growing influence in both the game and the global psyche in a recent NY Times op-ed piece, where he noted that the tournament would usher in a decade of Africa, in a symbolic gesture that, in a similar way in which with the opening of the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing, the United States passed the torch of history to China, the opening of the Cup in Cape Town would cover over hundreds of years of colonial wounds as we all stare bravely into the global future.

And yet, these arguments overwrite the real political problems that surround the global game.  Football is, no doubt, positive as a referent that allows cultures around the world to dialogue but not if it gives way to the misrepresentation of the reality of global politics.

Friday morning, 8 January, 2010, Togo’s national team was ambushed by the separatist group, Liberation of the Enclave of Cabinda, while traveling by bus through Angola, the Cup of Nations host country.  Two team officials and the team’s bus driver were killed in the attack.

Pessimists will argue that the incident preemptively mars Africa’s first World Cup.  Optimists will note that Angola and South Africa do not even share a border and have very different political infrastructures.  Realists, however, will surmise that the game, even if it is the world’s best symbolic hope, does not provide enough substance to overwrite the geopolitical trauma experienced in many post-colonial spaces.  While football may cause ebbs in national and regional histories, moments of unprecedented tans-cultural camaraderie and  ebullience amongst its followers, it does not lead to political stability in itself.

Some argue that the investment that hosting the tournament brings is a success story before the tournament even begins.  Yet, R.W. Johnson, in a piece on the politics surrounding the developmental side of the World Cup in South Africa published in the London Review of Books last month, points to the underbelly of investment: “The city had also wanted originally to locate the stadium in a black or Coloured area, both in order to encourage investment and jobs and to make it easier for the poor to attend matches. This immediately went out the window when the Fifa inspection team, headed by Franz Beckenbauer, visited Cape Town. One of the criteria they laid down was that the stadium should have ‘fine mountain views’. The team toured the poor areas, assumed the city had to be joking about choosing anywhere so obviously ugly and unsafe, and plumped for Green Point, an affluent white area with fine sea and mountain views and many good restaurants.”

Arguments can be made that in plucking a handful of players from the soccer farms in African and Latin American countries, just as Fifa plucks idyllic spaces to frame the game in its host countries, football is ascribing to a politics of underdevelopment.  And apologists such as Bono grease the wheels of the symbolic machine.

I am looking forward to both the African Cup of Nations and the World Cup as much as anyone and also believe that an international game, especially one with the intricate poetics and beauty of football, is still great for the world.  But let’s approach it with sobriety.  Cosmopolitan entertainment should not be confused with global panacea.  And theorists should be critical of arguments that say otherwise.

As Togo’s national team traveled through Angola this weekend, they took with them the borders of the global game.  In no way can the interaction at that border be interpreted as an embracing inclusivity.

With qualifying games for the 2010 World Cup being played all over the globe this weekend, not too much attention is being paid to the African qualification for the first World Cup on their own continent. Media outlets in Europe and America have their own qualifying matches to report on, and are for the most part ignoring the African competition. Without the internet, we might not even be aware of the fact that Ghana became the latest team to qualify for the World Cup, joining Australia, Japan, North Korea, South Korea, the Netherlands, Brazil, and South Africa.

Alright, it’s a fact that an African nation has never made it past the quarterfinals in a World Cup. But, although it depends on too many factors to make any close to accurate predictions, I would like my chances in a bet on at least one African team being in the semifinals next year.  Ghana is a candidate, but Ivory Coast, whose qualification can only be stopped by a mathematical miracle in Group E, are my personal favorites to accomplish the feat.

I watched Ivory Coast play Argentina in Hamburg during the 2006 World Cup, where Argentina, arguably the strongest team during that competition, was matched technically and tactically by an Ivorian squad that has only become stronger over the past four years. In their 5-0 defeat of Burkina Faso this weekend, their lineup included Emmanuel Eboue (Arsenal), Kolo Toure (Manchester City), Didier Zokora (Sevilla), Yaya Toure (Barcelona), Kader Keita (Galatasaray), Salomon Kalou (Chelsea), and Didier Drogba (Chelsea).

If this team continues to stay healthy and gets a slightly easier draw than in the last World Cup (Argentina and Holland in the group stage), it would not be an exaggeration to count them among the favorites for 2010. As the media prefer to discuss the failures of Cristiano Ronaldo’s Portugal and Lionel Messi’s Argentina, somebody will eventually have to focus on the teams actually participating in next year’s big event.