Subscribe via RSS Feed

Author Page for Dave Brockington

Born in San Jose, grew up in Seattle, received a Ph.D. in poli sci from University of Washington, worked for three years at Universiteit Twente in Enschede, Netherlands, and have worked at the University of Plymouth for eight academic years now in Plymouth, United Kingdom.

rss feed Facebook

Brazil 2 – 2 USA (aet, USA win 5-3 on pk)

[ 67 ] July 10, 2011 | Dave Brockington

First, apologies for an extended hiatus.  Not one to be left out of the fun, following the recent lead of Scott L and Erik, I was married a week ago Saturday, ensuring a trifecta of LGM weddings in a two week span.  As all but a few of our guests travelled in from out of town, there was considerable entertaining both pre and post, along with three nights of a honeymoon spent in Ashland, Oregon, taking in some plays at the Oregon Shakespeare Festival.

Superlatives will be used to describe the Brazil v USA quarter-final match in the World Cup, and most will be accurate: it was a classic.  You’ll also hear a lot about American exceptionalism, the indomitable American spirit, grit, a ‘can do’ ethic, etc.  Ignore that.

If you’ve neither watched nor read about this match, read about it.  Briefly, the US were one player down from the 65th minute, but still managed to hold onto a 1-1 draw after 90.  Two 15 minute extra time periods followed, but Brazil scored to go ahead 2-1 early in extra time on a wonderful Marta goal.  Some will argue that Brazil had a player offsides, and while I believe that to be true, the angle would have prevented the linesman from accurately observing this, and the American defence was horrible in allowing that goal anyway.  At this point Brazil used every delaying tactic possible, receiving two yellow cards and an additional (and exceptional for a 15 minute extra time period) three minutes of stoppage for their trouble.

What followed was one of those rare, fleeting, dramatic sporting moments.  Two minutes into stoppage time, meaning about a minute left in the match, Megan Rapinoe has the ball going down the left flank.  Abby Wambach is running down the right towards the box, and while this didn’t get into any of the replays I saw, watching it live Wambach had her arm aloft for about 15 yards of her run clearly requesting the ball.  Rapinoe delivers a perfect cross which Wambach heads in to level the score and send the match to penalties.  I had confidence heading into penalties, as Hope Solo, the US keeper, is one of the best in the business, and she managed one save to Brazil’s nil, allowing the US to advance to the semi finals.

The quality of the refereeing was sporadic at best, and those of us watching were highly critical of the “contentious”, according to the BBC, US red card at the 65th minute.  Buehler played the ball, not the opponent, and other accounts argue that it was shoulder-to-shoulder contact).  It wasn’t a foul.  Hope Solo saved the ensuing penalty, only for it to be called back for . . . what exactly?  Accounts are unclear.  Solo did not come off her line in the save, but she did earn her yellow card for dissent after the penalty was called back, and the retake was duly converted to make the match 1-1 and forcing the USA to ultimately enjoy 55 minutes down a player.

On June 23, I previewed the 2011 Women’s World Cup.  Now that we’re down to the four semi-finalists, it’s a safe time to review my mediocre predictions.  In the groups, I didn’t do horribly.  Group A I correctly predicted Germany to top, but instead of Canada finishing second, it was France.  I did say that France and Canada could go either way, but I really screwed up Canada as they finished fourth.  Group B I nailed, which is a little surprising because I thought it a bit optimistic to predict England to top the group over Japan.  In Group C I correctly predicted that both Sweden and the USA would progress, but I didn’t predict the USA losing to Sweden 2-1 allowing Sweden to top the group.  In Group D I reversed Norway (who finished third) with Australia (second), which was surprising.  I got six of the eight quarter finalists correct, only missing out on Australia and France.

My predictions for the semi finals are largely irrelevant now.  I had Brazil over England and Germany over USA (with Germany beating Brazil for the final).  Of those four, only the USA are in the semi finals (but at least all four did make the quarters).  For the semi finals, I’ll predict the USA over France, and Sweden over Japan.  While Sweden did defeat the USA in the group stage as well as in a friendly in January, against common opposition in the group (Colombia and North Korea) the United States performed better, so look for the USA to win the World Cup.

A prediction that is certain to go down well in both Japan and France considering my sketchy track record.

Wingnutia and History

[ 101 ] June 28, 2011 | Dave Brockington

First, she confused her John Waynes, and now her John Adamses.   Shorter Michele Bachmann: I don’t care if John Quincy Adams was only nine, he was a founding father dammit, and my minions will edit his wikipedia page to prove it.

I hope she never goes away.

Random Soccer Notes: 2011 World Cup, US Open Cup, and Relegation

[ 8 ] June 28, 2011 | Dave Brockington

USA 2-0 North Korea.

I watched the first half on line, then the ESPN page crapped out on me.  The US did not look great in the first half, but according to what I’ve read, they settled down in the second and took control of the match.  The Koreans have a ready excuse of course; part of the side were struck by lightening on June 8, which allegedly caused this 2-0 defeat three weeks later.

The US Open Cup (the American version of the FA Cup) has its third round proper beginning tonight.  It’s a misnomer to call it an “open” cup, however.  Whereas the English FA Cup is a true open competition, including all teams from the top nine tiers of the pyramid as well as selected teams from the 10th tier, the US Open Cup has a complicated qualifying system based on leagues / tiers in the American “pyramid“.  To wit, the MLS only has eight entrants in the Cup, with the top six sides automatically qualifying based on the league table, the rest go through a mini-tournament to qualify for the remaining two slots.

In effect, the tournament is limited to 40 teams (contrasted with the 762 who entered the 2009-10 edition of the FA Cup).  While there are also four qualifying rounds for the English cup, they’re not seeded nor based on a number of slots per league / division, although the higher divisions enter the competition in later rounds.

That said, the competition still does produce interesting matches, like tonight, the Seattle Sounders (who are the current cup holders and have won it the past two seasons) face the Kitsap Pumas of the USPDL, the fourth tier of American soccer.  They don’t have to travel far, as the Kitsap side are based in Bremerton, WA, just across the Puget Sound from Seattle.

Finally, River Plate were relegated from the Argentinian top tier for the first time, breaking a 110 year string in the top league.  They have more top flight championships than any other team in Argentine soccer; it would be analogous to the New York Yankees being relegated to AAA.  (I’d say Manchester United, but they were relegated in 1974).  This has not quite been met with the approval of their supporters.

USA 2 – 4 Mexico

[ 18 ] June 26, 2011 | Dave Brockington

CONCACAF Gold Cup Final.  I was unable to watch this one, as at our expansive Oregon estate we have the absolute bare minimum cable package.  I followed along on ESPN game cast, which itself was not an enjoyable experience.  It’s good that I couldn’t watch on tv.  The USA will not be playing in the 2013 Confederations Cup, which is a shame as we had a good run in 2009 (losing to Brazil in the final), but honestly, with the shape of the side at present, it’s probably a good thing we’re not in the 2013 edition.

If any good came from this match, it was the emergence of Freddy Adu.  Adu, a surprise call up, and an even more surprising starter, had by all accounts a fantastic game, our one true stand out.  I had given up on him a couple years ago, so this is a pleasant surprise.  Now, if he could only make something of his club career . . .

I do agree with James Martin that this lost could be a blessing in disguise (unlike Al Gore’s defeat in 2000, I think all of us on this side of wingnutia can agree that didn’t turn out particularly well).  However, I’m not sure what lessons can be learned from this defeat; it would appear to me that the balance of power in CONCACAF has shifted back to Mexico in the near term.  Oh, one lesson we can learn: don’t schedule the final, which was always going to be a USA – Mexico affair, in bloody Pasadena.  85% of the fans were supporting Mexico.  Hold it in Columbus, or Seattle, or Fargo, North Dakota.  Anywhere but the southern tier of the country.

To be positive, we have the Women’s World Cup to look forward to, where the USA has a decent chance (my predictions regardless) of winning the thing.  So far, it’s going according to my predictions (a state of existence that is certain to be derailed soon) with France defeating Nigeria and Germany beating Canada 2-1.  That Germany won in front of 72,000 partisan fans only makes it an uphill climb for the USA or Brazil to win the tournament.

Judicial Wankery

[ 22 ] June 25, 2011 | Dave Brockington

Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice David Prosser, feckless bully.  The last paragraph (a Prosser quote) is hilarious.

h/t Mary Dudas, John Emerson.

Criminalizing Gender: Kansas, Mississippi, and Alabama Editions

[ 55 ] June 25, 2011 | Dave Brockington

While yesterday provided a significant victory for progressive politics (and general ‘right thing to do’-ness), the forces of moral fascism reactionary citizenry continue unabated.

In Kansas, a new licensing law for abortion providers has passed, under the ruse of establishing “safety standards” in a state described by the head of Operation Rescue as “the Wild West for abortionists for as long as anyone can remember.”

There are precisely three providers in the entire state.

For now.  It’s absurd to imply that providers do not conduct business in line with professional standards of care, and this isn’t about that, obviously.

“These requirements range from the impossible to the absurd,” said Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “They’re not designed to protect patient safety; they’re designed to shut down abortion providers.”

And of course, safety standards will be somewhat difficult to enforce when reproductive freedom is criminalized.

Moving south, The Guardian has a good piece describing “the creeping criminalisation of pregnant women as a new front in the culture wars over abortion, in which conservative prosecutors are chipping away at hard-won freedoms by stretching protection laws to include foetuses, in some cases from the day of conception.”

In Mississippi, this takes the guise of a law that makes miscarriages suspect under “depraved-heart murder” of the unborn foetus, which carries a mandatory life sentence.  In one Mississippi case, the defense

have argued before Mississippi’s highest court that her prosecution makes no sense. Under Mississippi law it is a crime for any person except the mother to try to cause an abortion.  ”If it’s not a crime for a mother to intentionally end her pregnancy, how can it be a crime for her to do it unintentionally, whether by taking drugs or smoking or whatever it is,” Robert McDuff, a civil rights lawyer asked the state supreme court.

In Alabama, the “criminal endangerment law”, originally passed with the goal of protecting the children of hobbyists running meth labs, has been employed in prosecutions not consistent with the original intent of the state legislature.  The most grotesque case discussed in the article is that of Amanda Kimbrough, who

is one of the women who have been ensnared as a result of the law being applied in a wholly different way. During her pregnancy her foetus was diagnosed with possible Down’s syndrome and doctors suggested she consider a termination, which Kimbrough declined as she is not in favour of abortion.

The baby was delivered by caesarean section prematurely in April 2008 and died 19 minutes after birth.

Six months later Kimbrough was arrested at home and charged with “chemical endangerment” of her unborn child on the grounds that she had taken drugs during the pregnancy – a claim she has denied.

So here we have a woman, faced with a probable Down’s baby, who rejected termination as she doesn’t believe in abortion.  Not exactly the archtype target of such legislation, yet her case is before a higher Alabama court on appeal.

Women’s 2011 World Cup

[ 19 ] June 23, 2011 | Dave Brockington

kicks off Sunday, hosted by Germany.  My knowledge of the women’s game is vastly less developed than the men’s, and with the passing into retirement of the USA’s golden generation, I don’t even have a solid handle on our own side beyond a couple key players.  That said, I’m going to, in typical ill-advised fashion, have a go at this nonetheless.  I’m hoping some commenters with superior knowledge will contribute to the dialogue.

First, the FIFA rankings of the women’s sides is based on a superior methodology than the FIFA rankings of the men’s.  It’s a truncated version of the ELO methodology, which I tend to rely on when scouting relative strengths of men’s teams rather than the FIFA rankings.  The women’s rankings aren’t too surprising, with a top 5 of 1. USA, 2. Germany, 3. Brazil, 4. Japan, 5. Sweden.  There are some surprises lower down, e.g. 8. North Korea, 9. Norway (I’d have thought Norway should be ranked higher), England only at 10th, Mexico only at 22nd.

My ill-advised predictions:

Group A: 1. Germany, 2. Canada, 3. France, 4. Nigeria. Frankly, Canada and France could go either way, but I’m going with Canada on the strength of their winning the 2010 CONCACAF Gold Cup, whereas France  have been uneven in the past few months (losing to the Netherlands, drawing with Scotland).  Yes, straws are being wilfully clutched.

Group B: 1. England, 2. Japan, 3. Mexico, 4. New Zealand.  My head tells me to go with Japan to win this group, but I have to go with my adopted country instead.  The Guardian writes glowingly about the side, and even ESPN speaks of an England side with newfound respect.  Oh, and England did beat the USA 2-1 in an April friendly (while Japan lost twice to the USA the next month).  Mexico and the Kiwis could go either way.

Group C: 1. USA, 2. Sweden, 3. North Korea, 4. Colombia. I’m not sure what to make of North Korea.  They have won the Asian Cup three of the past five, and only lost in 2010 on penalties to Australia.  However, Sweden have several players in the American league, face stiffer competition in Europe, and have a more reliable track record in terms of measuring achievement (who cares that North Korea beat Singapore 24-0 or some similar NFL score).  Sweden also beat the USA in January.

Group D: 1. Brazil, 2. Norway, 3. Australia, 4. Equatorial Guinea. This group is easy.

So, based on the predictions above, my quarter-final predictions are Germany over Japan, USA over Norway, England over Canada, Brazil over Sweden.  Semifinals: Germany over USA, Brazil over England.  Final: Germany over Brazil.

I’d like to see the USA win, of course, but Germany are roughly equal in quality to the Americans, and it’s in Germany.

Pointless Provincialism, Olympic Soccer Edition

[ 20 ] June 22, 2011 | Dave Brockington

I briefly flirted with writing about this, but what’s the point?  By all accounts, including that of the PSNI, the UVF started it, and the “dissident Republicans” shot back.  Whatever.

London (and England, and even a bit of Wales) is hosting the 2012 Olympics.  Normally, this wouldn’t pose a problem to the host nation aside from bleeding out vast amounts of cash for limited material benefit.  The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland aren’t a normal nation, however, when it comes to soccer.  For historical reasons, FIFA recognize the “home nations” of England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland as independent entities for international purposes.  This extends to the rule-making body; with eight votes, the International Football Association Board sets the rules of association football.  The home nations have four of those votes, FIFA the other four, and six votes are required to effect any rule change.

This anachronistic arrangement would be analogous to the Basque Country and Catalonia having their own international sides, or Quebec, or Bavaria, or Utah.  Furthermore, unfortunately for the UK, the IOC doesn’t play by those rules.  For the UK to have a representative soccer side at the Olympics, it has to be under the rubric of “Team Great Britain”.  Team GB want to have a side at the Olympics for the first time since 1960, and will draw players from England, Scotland, Wales, and NI.

Which, logically, has pissed off three of the four home nations.  Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland are fearful that their inclusion in an aggregate Team GB could, possibly, cause FIFA to question their autonomy.  It doesn’t matter that FIFA have repeatedly stated that this would have no effect on the virtual independence of the home nations according to FIFA; these wee nations are jealous of their footballing autonomy.

I have no problem with this quaint arrangement.  David Goldblatt argues in his excellent The Ball is Round: A Global History of Soccer Football, nations, especially small nations, expressed themselves in an international context via soccer.  International soccer became a symbol, and identity, of the nation.  Goldblatt uses Uruguay as one of several examples, arguing that Uruguay as a nation-state had little logic beyond great power machinations (analogous to Africa) thus it relied heavily on success in soccer as a symbol of the nation (and some success it was: World Cup winners in 1930 over Argentina and 1950 over Brazil).  This can be readily generalized to the home nations.  Lacking any of the institutional infrastructure common to the nation state (until 1998 not even a “national” legislature), Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland look to soccer (and with the former two, rugby union) as symbols of their ersatz independence.

I understand why they’re jealous of this autonomy, and I don’t want my Welsh, Scottish, or Irish friends back in the UK to read this as an argument against said autonomy.  It’s not.

That said, not participating in the Olympics under a unified Team GB is just silly.  FIFA have made it clear over the past three years that a one-off Olympic team will not undermine the autonomy of the home nations.  The squad itself, consisting of 18 players, will be a U-23 squad save for three players without age restriction; in other words, not a full international side in any event.  Soccer matches will be hosted in Scotland and Wales in addition to England.  The English FA have the written approval of the three other home nations to select their players, which itself is meaningless, as legally according to the IOC the English FA have the right to choose any player eligible to play an Olympic sport for Great Britain regardless.  Furthermore, in rugby union the four home nations combine quadrennially to form the British and Irish Lions, who tour southern hemisphere nations.  Last I checked, the autonomy of neither the English, Welsh, Scottish, nor Irish RFU has been questioned as a result.

Finally, for the players from Wales, Northern Ireland, and even Scotland, the 2012 Olympics might represent the only opportunity that they have to play in a serious international tournament.  Scotland on occasion have a chance to qualify for tournaments, and nearly did so for Euro 2008, but the last tournaments Scotland participated in were the 1998 World Cup and the 1996 European Championships.  Northern Ireland has only participated in the World Cups of 1958, 1982, and 1986; the only ever appearance of Wales in a major tournament was the 1958 World Cup.  In qualifying for Euro 2012, Wales are doomed already, while Scotland and Northern Ireland find qualification highly unlikely.  Indeed, the current bright hope of Welsh soccer, Gareth Bale, said last month:

“I want to play in the Olympics. I think it would be a great experience.  You see it with the British and Irish Lions in the rugby, they come together as a unit and play against other countries. It’s great and there’s no reason why that can’t happen with the football.  At the moment Wales haven’t qualified for a major tournament in I don’t know how many years so it would be nice to play in one against the best countries in the world.”

Or, one might adopt the attitude of former Scotland manager Craig Brown, who said in 2009:

“If there is an insistence on having UK representation, why not allow all four teams to compete?  Football is already a special case in the Olympics because it discriminates by only allowing players under 23 to compete, so why not allow the four sides from the UK?”

Because, until Alex Salmond passes a referendum on Scottish independence, Scotland isn’t quite a real country, yet?

Clarence Clemons 1942 – 2011

[ 6 ] June 19, 2011 | Dave Brockington

Though we could sort of see it coming, Damn.

Judicial Ethics

[ 27 ] June 19, 2011 | Dave Brockington

If Clarence Thomas were a Democrat, it’s not too difficult to imagine that this would result in a Congressional inquiry.  Combined with the involvement of Virginia Thomas in Liberty Central, there’s just enough smoke here to suspect some sort of ethically-challenged inferno.

Certainly more smoke than William O Douglas was generating in 1970.  But then, Republicans have a different set of rules that they get to play by.

UPDATE[SL]:   And Fortas was forced to resign for doing indistinguishable things, with substantial historical consequences.

Random Jetlagged Blogging: The Falklands, Northern Ireland, and Zombies.

[ 39 ] June 17, 2011 | Dave Brockington

In response to Leicester City Council’s egregious lack of a Zombie Attack Preparedness Plan, over 200 intrepid citizens will stage a mock zombie attack on Leicester in a public-spirited demonstration of the risks involved.  Hopefully Leicester get off their collective asses and put a plan in place as soon as possible.  This is serious.

Prime Minister Cameron has been called “arrogant” and certain remarks of his made on Wednesday rejected as “mediocrity and stupidity”.  Ed Miliband certainly doesn’t have this degree of chutzpah; rather it was Argentine President Cristina Fernandez, responding to Cameron’s statement during PM’s questions that “I would say this: as long as the Falkland Islands want to be sovereign British territory, they should remain sovereign British territory – full stop, end of story.”

I agree with Cameron so far as democratic self-determination should be the governing principle.  Of course, should Argentina plan a reprise of the 1982 war, the British are in a much weaker position than 30 years ago.  Lacking any aircraft carriers, and with only four Typhoons based at RAF Mount Pleasant, it’s difficult to see how the Falklands could be defended.

Consistent with the theme of self-determination in British overseas territories or “provinces”, the new Life and Times survey, commissioned by the office of first and deputy first minister of Northern Ireland, reports that 73% of respondents want to remain part of the United Kingdom rather than united with the Republic.  This isn’t surprising.  Nor is that 52% of the Catholic community feel the same.

Saturday night I had a friend over my house in England as a goodbye (and for goodbye, he brought a bottle of single malt which did not survive the evening).  We’re broadly like minded on Northern Ireland, save that he’s closer to the republican end of the spectrum and I’m nationalist.  I argued, as I do, that if there were ever to be a united Ireland, the only way that this could be legitimately achieved is through a plebiscite, and a mere 50%+1 yes vote would not be enough.  We discussed what would happen if such a plebiscite were held today, and he was shocked at my suggestion that a significant share of the Catholic community would vote to remain in the UK.

My ad-hoc reasoning behind this was economic (Ireland is barely on the good side of the Iceland – Greece club) and generational.  It’s been nearly 90 years since partition, the vast majority of which clearly sucked for the Catholic community, but also 13 years since the Good Friday agreement.  While that night I suggested a lower percentage (not the presence) of the Catholic respondents favoring remaining with the UK than the 52% reported, I am surprised that 4% of the Protestant community favors a united Ireland.

Random Airport Blogging: SEA Edition

[ 26 ] June 15, 2011 | Dave Brockington

I’m at the tail end of a LHR-ORD-SEA-PDX itinerary, on which I can happily state I have not paid for a single drink.

That said, as I was (sadly soberly) meandering my way through the warrens that is Heathrow about . . . 20 hours ago, Heathrow seemed to serve as a perfect metaphor for the development of British democracy. Built sporadically, incrementally, muddled through without vision.  Might be fine for a glacier, but not something designed to get people places.

Or designed at all, really.

Also, my rosary caused some bother in security at ORD.  I took delight in that, being the morally relativistic trailblazer that certain uptight Catholic segments of wingnutia believe I am (so uptight she had to point out that one of her own allies is a — gasp – Protestant).

Page 10 of 31« First...891011122030...Last »

    • Switch to our mobile site