“Upset,” I said. Actually, that’s a pretty mild term for this decision, which in many respects defies reason. Consider:

• Qatar is an extremely small nation with almost no soccer history of infrastructure. It certainly doesn’t have anything remotely like ten stadiums that can hold a World Cup crowd. However, this is an area overrun with oil money, so the plan is to build all the stadiums they’ll need. Then, after the Cup, they’ll disassemble them and donate them to countries that need large stadiums. I’m not making this up.
• How is all this infrastructure going to be built? Best guess: imported labor. Working in insane heat (see next bullet) and living in less-than-luxurious conditions. Don’t expect too many pictures of this process on the FIFA Web site in the coming years.
• Temperatures in July average well over a 100°F and can range far higher than that. Their solution? Air conditioning. They’re going to air condition outdoor stadiums.
• Our friend Rafael Noboa y Rivera also reminds us about the culture clash issues. World Cups tend to be popular with partiers – drunken, half-naked, frequently female partiers – while Qatar is governed by Shari’a law. This is a country so aggressively fundamentalist that it still imprisons gays. It ought to be fascinating to watch. I hope they do a massive multiplayer video game about the activity outside the stadium. And you can play either side. FIFA 2022: 21st Century vs. 14th Century. I smell money.

If you’re thinking this decision smells like meat that’s been left out in the boiling Arabian sun for a couple of days, you aren’t alone. And there are a couple of issues to be pondered. First, why Qatar? Second, why not the US?

The first question is unparsable on rational grounds. FIFA is an international organization that fancies itself a progressive promoter of humanist values (take its anti-racism endeavors, for instance), so a decision to award its signature event to a nation run by a regressive, anti-humanist code from the Dark Ages is inexplicable. And the environmental statement being made is nothing short of appalling. We used to hear a bit about the Green Goal Programme, and they’re making a very big deal about green policies at the Women’s World Cup sites. But if you Google “Green Goal Programme” and start clicking the FIFA links that come up, you’ll notice that they’re gone 404. I don’t know when or why, but this is conspicuous. FIFA passed over Holland/Belgium for the 2018 Cup (a bid that made sustainability a centerpiece of the pitch) in favor of Russia, and then awarded the 2022 event to a crew that’s promising to burn enough oil to air condition the feckin’ desert. Godzilla-sized carbon footprint, anyone?

Wow.

Then there’s part two. Because not only did FIFA not award the Cup to the nation that set the all-time attendance record in 1994 (and that has since witnessed a significant growth in the sport’s popularity), it crawled naked over a lot of jagged terrain to get away from us. Why?

Well, we may never know for sure. Suitcases full of unmarked petrodollars being slid under the table is a powerful carrot, but a few months back someone I was talking to (and I can’t remember who is was, so my apologies for not providing proper credit), pointed something else out.

America has a problem where in-bound travel is concerned. I can’t find any stats, but have heard plenty of anecdotal evidence suggesting that Homeland Security policies, which get more paranoid by the year, present an increasingly formidable barrier to gaining entry to the country. Now, think about 2022, when hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of internationals will be seeking to come here for the World Cup. And, not to put too fine a point on it, but think about where these people are coming from, in some cases, and what they look like.

In a very real sense, this would represent a great opportunity for a would-be terrorist organization seeking to either attack in a spectacular fashion or sneak in aided by the chaos. Then imagine that chaos amplified a thousand times by a security apparatus that’s under intense stress already. (Of course, one doesn’t imagine that your average al Qaeda operative would find Qatar exactly inaccessible…)

I’ve heard foreigners say that the rest of the world has had about enough of America’s bullshit when it comes to security. The rest of the free world, they say, manages these problems far better than we do. I’ve heard the same sentiments echoed by Americans who travel abroad a lot, as well.

In light of all this, the person who brought the issue to my attention argued that no way in hell would an organization like FIFA award us the Cup when it was clear we had no clue about managing the logistics associated with the influx of fans from every corner of the globe.

And this was before the whole Gate Rape fiasco exploded in the past few weeks. You figure if FIFA officials were concerned about the security question at all, then our highly publicized controversies over backscatters and pat-downs couldn’t have come at a worse time.

As I say, we may never know. And it’s been a long time since I heard anybody holding forth on the ethical purity of those who run FIFA. Maybe it has nothing to do with security or air conditioning. Maybe it’s as simple as Qatar brought more bribe money than we did.

One thing’s for sure, though. Copa 2022 is going to be interesting, and for reasons that go well beyond what’s happening on the pitch.

People ask me why I love soccer, and I tell them: because it’s the closest any sport gets to reflecting the agony and glory of life on this small orb. Now, I can point them to the last seven minutes of this game to drive the point home.

I say the last seven minutes, because within that spread of time, you saw it all.

With literally no time left in the second period of extra time, Ghana mounted one last, ferocious attack on Uruguay’s goal. Once, twice, thrice Ghana struck – and at the last, when the ball seemed headed into the back of the net, and Ghana’s Black Stars seemingly headed towards immortality, the hand of Luis Suarez got in the way.

Which would have been spectacular, except for the minor fact that Suarez is a striker, not a goalkeeper. Strikers are most definitely not allowed to use their hands. But with the game on the line, with a trip to the World Cup semifinals on the line – a place that Uruguay, a proud soccer nation, hadn’t seen in forty years – what else would you do?

The referee whistled. The crimson flashed, sealing Suarez’s doom. And the ball was placed on the penalty spot.

For the third time in this World Cup, Ghana’s Asamoah Gyan would take a penalty kick as a result of a handball in the penalty area. Two times, he had icily delivered the scoring blow. All Gyan had to do was do something that, quite literally, he’d done twice before over the last two weeks, and quite likely, millions of times before then.

Only this time, the moment was incomparably greater. Scoring this would mean Ghana would become the first African team to advance to a World Cup semifinal. Deliver the killing blow against Uruguay, and Gyan then leads Ghana against the Netherlands in three days’ time – a Netherlands team that had looked decidedly wobbly in beating Brazil.

Gyan glanced towards the goal. Fernando Muslera, Uruguay’s keeper, stood before him, the only obstacle between hope and history.

Gyan struck. Muslera dove. The ball rose.

And then struck the crossbar, and sailed off into the night, taking a whole continent’s hopes with it. Asamoah Gyan stood on the soft, well-trod grass of the field, disbelieving, poleaxed.

And Uruguay, astonishingly enough, still lived.

They took swift advantage. Forlan, Victorino and Scotti all struck home in the penalty shootout for La Celeste, as did Appiah and Gyan for Ghana, thus gaining some small measure of redemption.

Then Ghana’s Mensah missed, with a weak, mincing attempt that Muslera turned away easily. But just when Uruguay could’ve iced it, Maxi Pereira missed as well.

Ghana still lived, barely. But Adiyah failed, giving Muslera another easily-parried shot. Sebastian Abreu’s softly chipped shot, struck as Ghana keeper Richard Kingson dove the wrong way, ended the contest.

What didn’t end – and won’t end, really – is the heartbreak of a dream deferred. Deferred, not denied, because an African country will break through. And if there’s any justice, poetic, sporting or otherwise, Asamoah Gyan will hoist the World Cup in four years time.

But since when has justice proved a part of life? Life is, after all, unfair – and so is soccer.

What’s more, I expect them to defeat Uruguay and make it to the semifinals.  Uruguay, while they’re very good, didn’t particularly impress in beating South Korea 2-1. For much of the second half, they seemed on the verge of conceding a game-winning goal to the Koreans – but they didn’t, and Suarez’s wonder goal late in the day saved them. If Ghana plays against Uruguay like they did against the U.S., they will beat them.

Which brings me to the Americans.

[shakes head]

[shakes head even more emphatically]

Let me be clear, like President Obama: the U.S. will likely never have as fortuitous a road to the semifinals of a World Cup as we did this year. We were playing Ghana, it’s true, and Ghana had beaten us in 2006. But it’s Ghana we’re talking about here.

Not Germany. Not Brazil. Not Spain. Not Argentina.

Ghana.

I know that a lot of folks are approaching this loss by saying, “well, at least we got out of the group stage. Yay, us!” I’m going to disagree with that assessment. This is a disappointing result.

I first started following soccer when I was 11 years old. I read a book about the old NASL San Jose Earthquakes, and it featured several players from the Premier League team Tottenham Hotspurs. Ever since, I’ve been a Spurs fan; like the English team that got annihilated by Germany today, Spurs had their glory years in the ’60s, and have been living off those laurels since.

I got hooked on US Soccer in 1990, when they qualified for the World Cup for the first time in 40 years. From the vantage point of two decades, it’s hard to describe to someone who just started following the US Soccer team just how abysmal the state of soccer was just two decades ago.

There was no MLS. You were lucky to catch a soccer game on TV, and if you did, it was likely at 3 AM, when the only competition was Ronco products. To the degree that American players played in Europe, they tended to play for second-rank clubs.

So, when they went to Italy for the Cup, their rank inexperience showed. They got whipped soundly, finishing last in their group. And 1994 wasn’t much better – although they made it out of their group, the U.S. needed the most tragic own goal in soccer history in order to advance*.

Here’s the thing: it’s not 1990 or 1994 anymore, and we should quit treating the US Soccer team like it is.

I think that expectation, as much as anything else, is holding US Soccer back. Look at the group we were in – not only did we win the group, we outscored England, supposedly the class of the group. Meanwhile, we have a domestic league that, while still second-class, serves as a professional destination for American players looking to ply their trade and develop further.

It’s time, I think, to heighten our expectations. I’m no longer satisfied, as a fan of US Soccer, to just make it out of the group. That, at a minimum, should be the expectation going forward.

This goes beyond a coach, or a game, or even a World Cup. It goes to how the game is organized in the United States. America is the *only* country where soccer is a suburban, middle-to-upper-class sport. Everywhere else, soccer occupies the place that basketball holds here – it’s an inner city sport in Argentina, in Brazil, in Germany…everywhere.

The two biggest deficiencies the American team has are lack of defensive skill and lack of offensive firepower. Yes, I said that we outscored Germany, but what’s notable is that we expect our midfielders, especially Landon Donovan & Clint Dempsey, to score. That’s actually not normal for soccer – normally, you have your midfielders control the run of play and set the table for the strikers – in our case, Jozy Altidore and Robbie Findley.

Guess which names *weren’t* called out at this World Cup?

The same thing goes for the defensive back line. I’m going to throw out a number here. How minutes did the U.S. lead in the Cup, out of 390 played?

Try 3.

Yes, three.

We gave up the earliest and second earliest goals of the World Cup – 4 minutes in against England, 5 minutes in against Ghana. We were down 2-0 against Slovenia, before coming back to tie.

The two deficiencies go together. If you’re giving up goals early, you place way too much pressure on your offense (already deficient) to produce goals. And if you lack finishing power, you can’t take advantage of scoring opportunities when they present themselves.

As awesome as that moment was against Algeria, that’s all it was: a moment. And it’s a moment that shouldn’t even have taken place, because we whiffed on about 17 different chances to score against Algeria, and another 12 against Ghana.

Who knows how many players we’re missing out on because US Soccer doesn’t have inner city programs? Soccer is quite likely the cheapest sport to play. If they can play soccer in Brazilian favelas, then they can play soccer in Bed-Stuy.

I’ve ragged on Bill Simmons for his misunderstanding of sports, but he has a point – can you imagine Allen Iverson playing soccer at forward, with his nose for the basket? Can you imagine someone like Shane Battier, with his intelligence, playing defense?

It was those two deficiencies that were on brutal display yesterday against Ghana. We got caught napping on defense…which led to us playing from behind again…which meant we forced too many chances. It was Ghana, but it was also England, and it was Slovenia. There’s only one of those teams that we should’ve been trailing, and you know which one it is. Hint: it’s where the game was born.

This is ridiculous. I’ll close here, but to me, at least, it’s time to clean house. People are speculating about coach Bob Bradley’s tenure, but that’s missing the point. The house-cleaning has to go higher. US Soccer has a reputation for being cheap, so it’s laughable for them to say, “We’re going to win the World Cup by X year”. Seriously – the next time you hear a US Soccer official say that, you should laugh in their face, and mock them for the chumps they are.

If you want to win, you have to spend, for the most part. Until US Soccer decides to do that, I can’t take them seriously. It’s time to give the US Soccer team a US Soccer Federation worthy of their skill, effort, and dedication.

*Most tragic because it resulted in the murder of Andres Escobar, the Colombian national team captain who scored the own goal. If you haven’t seen the ESPN 30 for 30 documentary “The Two Escobars”, you’re missing out.

For those of you (paging Rick Reilly) who hate on soccer because of all the damned draws, you can rest your objections. If teams are tied after regular time, two 15 minute periods of extra time are played; if it’s still tied after that, then we go to penalty shootout. Needless to say, this makes for some truly exciting soccer.

So, quick take: This is a remarkably diverse Sweet Sixteen. It’s a sign of the increasing parity in world soccer that traditional soccer heavyweights like Italy and France (the finalists from 2006) didn’t even survive the round-robin. You want parity? Try this on: Japan and Korea made it out of group play, and could credibly advance to the semifinals. That’s like Butler playing Duke for the NCAA title.

Without further ado, onward. Previews on the flip.

URUGUAY vs SOUTH KOREA (June 26): In many ways, Korea and Uruguay are mirror images of each other, as far as the team goes.

South America’s had a phenomenal tournament, thus far. How good? Consider this: we could potentially have an all-South American World Cup semifinal round. That said, of all the South American sides, Uruguay’s likely the weakest. Because of that, though, it’s also the most likely to be underrated. They possess decent scoring ability with Diego Forlan and Luis Suarez, while captain Diego Lugano does a fine job of backstopping the defense.

As for South Korea, this is the second time they’ve made it out to the knockout stage – the other time came when they hosted the Cup 8 years ago, and made a wonder run to the semifinals. Like their Asian counterparts Japan, they’re fairly disciplined defensively, sneakily lethal on the counterattack, and pack some offensive punch. Look for Lee Jung-Soo to pace the Korean attack – he’s got 2 goals already, with Lee Dong-Gook (their leading goalscorer, with 25) to break out of his scoring slump.

It’s hard to pick a winner here, but I’m going to go with the Latin-American flow, and pick Uruguay to win 2-1 in a close, hard-fought game.

U.S.A. vs GHANA (June 26): An epic preview for what’s likely to be one of three epic matches in this round.

Oh, Africa. The hopes were so very high that this would be the World Cup where African teams – who’ve blessed the game with players like Roger Milla, Michael Essien, and Didier Drogba – would finally break through en masse to the knockout rounds.

Instead of a dream, African fans got a nightmare in the round robin? Nigeria? Gone. Cameroon? The Indomitable Lions remake got cancelled. Les Elefants won’t be dancing, and the vuvuzelas won’t be blowing for South Africa’s Bafana Bafana, the first host team to be denied a golden ticket for the Sweet Sixteen in World Cup history.

The sole survivor? The Black Stars of Ghana. That said, this is a team that’s well equipped to make a deep run and redeem African hopes. Asamoah Gyan, who’s stepped up in the absence of Ghanian wonder striker Michael Essien, roams tirelessly in the attack, always ready to pounce on a loose ball and make teams pay. Their defense is relentless, suffocating attack after attack.

They’ll be facing the U.S.A., who are making their customary every-other-Cup appearance in the knockout stages. Of all the matches in the Sweet 16, this is the most even. In no other match will the first goal tallied matter more than in this one. Bold, I know, but here’s why:

Thanks to a missing Michael Essien and an unfit Sulley Muntari, Ghana haven’t scored more than a goal in six straight matches. Their only two goals in the group round came off penalty kicks for handballs. They struggled to score not just against Germany, but even against an Australia squad that the U.S.A. shelled 3-1 while looking poor themselves. Their strategy, thus far, has been to score and then pack nine men behind the ball, while leaving Gyan to roam on rare counterattacks. Frankly, it’s dreadful, negative stuff.

Should the U.S. give up an early goal against the Black Stars, as they did in playing England and Slovenia, it’ll be phenomenally difficult for them to tally an equalizer. Should the U.S. score once or twice early on, Ghana will be hard-press to draw even, thanks to their lack of attacking prowess.

As cool as it would be to see the lone African team make a deep run, I think Ghana are too offensively deficient. As long as the American defense makes no mistakes, I favor them to avenge their controversial loss to Ghana from 2006, and defeat the Black Stars 2-0.

NETHERLANDS vs SLOVAKIA (June 28): Admit it – after Slovakia’s performance in the first two games of this World Cup, you weren’t expecting them to make it to the second round. They got stunned by a New Zealand side that came, literally, within 4 inches of shocking the world by beating Italy, and only had one shot on goal against Paraguay’s side.

Then they played Italy, and in one of the crazier games of the Cup, beat them 3-2. All it takes is one game, folks. Just like that, they were through, and Italy wasn’t, for the first time since 1974.

So, what now? Well, the truth is that Slovakia really isn’t that good of a team. They tend to play what’s now become a standard 4-2-3-1 formation, but it’s a pretty plain defense and even plainer attack, lacking much creativity. That they scored 3 goals on the Azzuri is less a testament to the Slovaks’ magnificence than to how putrid this edition of Italy’s squad was.

Now they face the Netherlands. If ever a team looked lackluster while going 3-0-0 in their group, it was them. They clearly looked as if they badly missed Arjen Robben directing the wondrous mechanics of Clockwork Orange.  Despite Robben’s absence, Wesley Sneijder keyed the attack, allowing the Oranje to run the table.

Truthfully, the wonder is a tad bit overstated – this isn’t the Netherlands of Johan Cruyff, much like Brazil isn’t the Brazil of Socrates. That said, they’re the best European team, winning all 8 of their matches in qualification, and look poised to make a deep run to at least the semis, now that Robben is back in charge.

I’m picking the Netherlands in a blowout, 4-0.

BRAZIL vs CHILE (June 28): No team faces a tougher road to the title than Brazil.

Think about it. Should they beat Chile (more on that in a second), they would potentially face the world’s second-ranked team in the Netherlands in the quarters, then have to deal with the dangerously underrated quartet of Uruguay, Korea, U.S.A. and Ghana in the semifinals, before finally facing one of Argentina, Germany, or Spain* for the championship.

And Chile? La Roja is no joke, folks. They play in a wildly unorthodox 3-3-1-3, which favors a wildly entertaining and attacking orientation. Even though they lost to Spain 2-1 to close out their group play, that was more the result of yet another goalkeeper howler, combined with a horrible red card. In that game, they wasted 3 chances in the first 20 minutes, which really should’ve seen Spain losing 2-0 and facing a shameful exit.

Instead, we’ve got the third great game of this round. I fully expect that Chile will give Brazil fits, as they ceaselessly attack…and attack…and attack some more. Luckily for Brazil, they’ve got a great defense to go with their offense, and I think that will prove to be the difference here, since Chile will be missing both of their starting central defenders, thank s to red cards.

I expect Brazil to defeat Chile 2-1, but I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Chile managed to scratch out a win here by the same tally. Chile’s that good.

ARGENTINA vs MEXICO (June 27): Look, I won’t blame you for thinking that Argentina’s coach, Diego Maradona, is insane. You wouldn’t be the only one. For starters, Maradona is fielding a lineup that’s chockfull of attackers, while missing defenders. The bet that he made, simply, was that the Albiceleste would outscore you, making up for any defensive lapses that would happen (and they have).

As badly as Argentina struggled during qualification, it seems to have come together splendidly here in South Africa. Lionel Messi, despite not having scored yet in this Cup, is clearly well-tapped as the Cup’s MVP. They were simply dominant in their group – demolishing a good Korean squad 4-1, for example.

Meanwhile, this Mexican squad is also in fine mettle. They’re young, it’s true – but with the youth comes also excitement. El Tri have shown a nose for the attack, particularly the counterattack. Mexico have the ability to pose problems for Argentina’s defense, by preying on Argentinian defender Martin Demichelis’ propensity for boneheaded play. Mexico’s defense is pretty sterling as well – witness their play against France and Uruguay.

So, it’s entirely possible that Mexico could beat Argentina, book a place in the quarters for the third time in history, and potentially go further than any Mexican team ever. They have the offense and defense to do the deed, and if they can beat Argentina, they can beat a seemingly shaky Germany, or a staggering England.

[SIDEBAR: Believe it or not, for as much as Mexicans like to woof about their supposedly great soccer pedigree, the U.S. has gone further than Mexico in the Cup, making the semis in 1930. Mexico made the quarters in 1970 and 1986, but has otherwise been lackluster. They've only been really successful, internationally, since 1994 - roughly tracking with the U.S.]

Entirely possible, but not probable. In the end, I’m expecting this to be the second great game of this round, full of open play, with plenty of scoring chances. And at the end of Mexico’s day, the sun will set on their Cup hopes with a 3-2 loss to Argentina.

GERMANY vs ENGLAND (June 27): There’s a certain kind of England fan that always looks at their contests with Germany as a rivalry, and casts that rivalry in warlike terms, hearkening back to World War II, making tired jokes about the French, the Americans and the Germans.

I understand. It’s easy to live in the kind of frozen amber that that fantasy requires, because the reality of England’s performance at the World Cup is disappointing at best, and disheartening at worst.

Consider this: since England beat Germany 4-2 to win its only Cup in 1966, Germany has made the second round every single time – 11 straight cups and counting. They’ve won two Cups, finished second four times (including ‘66), and third twice. They’ve made it to the quarters seven straight Cups. They’ve made it to the semifinals the last two Cups.

In that time, England have made the semifinals once, and failed to qualify three times. While they’ve made the quarters the last two Cups, let’s just say that the Three Lions haven’t covered themselves in glory, exactly.

Moreover, England’s record against Germany is miserable – aside from the win in 1966 for the Cup, and another in the 2000 European Championships, it’s been nothing but defeat after defeat, with the most painful coming in 1990 – the last time England made the semifinals.

That said, this could prove to be a closer match than many expect. Germany’s been shaky their last two matches, having had trouble creating chances and even greater trouble finishing them. Meanwhile, there’s a possibility that England have managed to overcome the collective funk that they found themselves in after drawing their first two games.

More than most, this is a hard match for me to read. If any match this round goes to a penalty kick shootout, it’s this one. And there’s history on my side for this: the last two times these teams have met in the knockout stages of a tournament, it’s gone that far. Both times, die Mannschaft has reigned supreme, serenely escorting the Lions out.

It ends here, it ends now, I say. I’m saying Wayne Rooney finally lives up to billing. I’m saying England beats Germany, 1-1, with the English finally winning a shootout.

PARAGUAY vs JAPAN (June 29): This game is a mystery to me. Really, it is. Both of these teams are criminally underrated.

I read once that the key to pitching in baseball was to break up the hitter’s rhythm. Well, that’s what both Paraguay and Japan do – they break their opponent’s run of play, they disrupt their rhythm, with their disciplined play on defense. Then, once they score, their style of play forces teams to panic and overcommit on offense, thus opening up more attacking lanes for Paraguay/Japan to counterattack. And…score!

Now you’re panicking – waitwaitwait, are we really losing 2-0 to PARAGUAY/JAPAN? REALLY? And just as you’re setting the table for a score to draw within 1 goal, suddenly you’re backpedaling, suddenly you’re seeing the ball settle gently within the goal a third time, as your keeper stretches desperately, vainly, to prevent the goal. Now you’re down 3-0, and your day is over.

Rinse, repeat, finis.

What’s interesting to me is that I don’t know who wins this game – it’s going to be a real chess match of a game, and it wouldn’t surprise me a bit to see this a 0-0 draw going into extra time. But eventually, someone will break. What I don’t know is if it will be Japan or Paraguay breaking.

I’m leaning towards Paraguay here, given that they play against Brazil and Argentina regularly, rather than the minnows that Japan plays in Asia. I think Paraguay’s greater experience at the World Cup is the difference here, and the Guaranis take advantage, 1-0.

SPAIN vs PORTUGAL (June 29): Congratulations. You’ve made it. This is the end of the preview. Too bad that it’s a preview of a match likely to contend with Netherlands v Slovakia for worst match of this round.

Spain had really high expectations going into this World Cup. They’d been unbeaten in 45 out of their 46 previous games, their only loss coming in the 2009 Confederations Cup against the U.S.A. Their last game before the Cup began was a 6-1 romp over Poland. La Furia was the hipster choice for World Cup favorites.

And then…and then it came crashing down with a 1-0 loss to Switzerland. Let’s get one thing clear: there’s negative soccer, where offenses sputter and die, and then there’s what Switzerland plays, which is closer to a black hole, where soccer goes, never to be seen again.

They recovered to beat Honduras and Chile to win their group, but one senses that this Spanish team feels vulnerable, shorn of their innocence, waiting for the inevitable heartbreak that’s a hallmark of Spanish soccer (before their Euro 2008 title, Spain had gone 44 years without winning a title of any kind).

Now they face a Portugal squad that’s the antithesis of everything good about soccer, led by soccer’s equivalent of Alex Rodriguez, Cristiano Ronaldo. This is a squad that never fails to become intimately acquainted with the ground, thanks to their propensity to dive when breathed upon. Indeed, this tendency gave me one of my favorite moments of the Cup: Brazil’s Luiz Fabiano hectoring Portugal’s Pepe to get his punk ass off the ground and quit diving in their game today.

Here’s the thing, though: as witnessed by their 7-0 thrashing of North Korea, Portugal can play awesome, attacking soccer that’s fun to watch. That said, even that win was sour, having every element of watching a bully pound a hapless kid into the ground.

That’s why you can’t root for Portugal. There’s something deeply wrong about the way they play, something fundamentally corrupt and rotten and putrid. It’s the kind of insecure game that only posers and guys who roofie drinks play, and it deserves every ounce of derision possible.

If there’s any justice to be had in this game, Spain wins. Luckily for us, Spain is going to pound Portugal’s sorry ass into the ground. Look for Spain to win 2-0, in a game that really should be 3-0 or 4-0. And if the soccer gods are listening, 7-0.

That’s all she wrote. If things go as I expect, the quarters will feature some truly awesome matchups. Tell me who you pick in the comments.

*I’m not kidding. As I detail in the post, anyone can come out of that bracket, and it wouldn’t be ludicrous. Japan & Paraguay are solid squads, England could snap back into qualification form, and it bears remembering that Portugal are ranked third in the world. That side of the bracket is murderous.

Howard; Cherundolo, DeMerit, Bocanegra (c), Bornstein; Donovan, Bradley, Edu, Dempsey; Gomez, Altidore

And here’s the ALG lineup: Mbolhi; Bougherra, Halliche, Yahia (c); Kadir, Yebda, Lacen, Belhadj; Matmour, Djebbour, Ziani.

All in all, an attacking lineup. Missing from it: Oguchi Onyewu, who, frankly, has had a rollercoaster World Cup performance. The eyebrow raiser? Jonathan Bornstein, who’s been much maligned for his poor play.

I’m picking the U.S. to beat Algeria 2-0 in what should be a tense, taut game. Algeria’s actually had a decent World Cup; they’re one goalkeeper howler (by Chaouchi, who’s been replaced) from having back-to-back clean sheets. It’s vital that we don’t give up an early, easy gimme goal. If we win, and England & Slovenia draw, we win Group C, which means we should have a marginally easier opponent in the next round.

Leave your pick in the comments.

A lot rides on the outcome, and not just of this one game. In general, World Cup 2010 is a watershed moment for soccer in the US, and billions of dollars hang in the balance. On the pitch, this American team is as capable as any we’ve had, perhaps ever. And our infrastructure is improving daily, with better youth programs, better intermediate development programs and academies, a rapidly improving pro league and more and more of our top players finding their way into European sides – and the ability to succeed in top-of-the-table sides in England, Italy, Spain, Germany, France and Holland is the real measure of where you stand in the global food chain.

So you can expect American teams to keep getting better and better, regardless of the result in South Africa.

The reason Copa 2010 is so important, though, is money. If the US gets out of the group stage (not guaranteed, but we should) and perhaps wins in the round of 16, that sends a message to the American sports fan that the US is a serious player in the world’s game. As I noted several years ago, people carp about soccer for a number of reasons (low scoring, for instance), but when push comes to shove, what really keeps us away from MLS parks and televised games is the fact that, well, a lot of pissant little countries are better than we are. And from the limited and jingoistic perspective of the typical American sports fan, if Wherethefuckistan beats you at something, that something isn’t a valid game by definition.

And make no mistake, Americans like to win. We insist on it. We’re used to being the best and at some level we probably feel it’s our right. And frankly, we don’t much trust any sport where godforsaken France is better than us.

Think about it. What sports will Americans plop down their money for? Football? You betcha – and we’re the best at it (of course, that’s pretty much by default, isn’t it?) Baseball? Our game, and we’re the best in the world at it. Hoops? Ditto, although the rest of the world is slowly catching up. Hockey? Ummm, well, we’re #2 right now, and to be honest, our fourth most popular sport draws pathetic TV ratings (which sucks, because I feel like you can’t possibly not love the game if you know a little about it).

What else? Well, to a lesser extent, tennis, golf, maybe even a little track and field. Boxing. Stock car racing. And these are all sports where if we aren’t the best at the moment, we were recently enough and fully expect to be again in the near future. In fact, to the best of my knowledge, there is pretty much no sport that Americans care enough to watch in significant numbers that we aren’t a world power in.

Lately, though, something has been changing where the American sports consciousness is concerned. A few weeks ago I woke up one morning, flipped on SportsCenter to find that the top story was … not the NBA playoffs. Not the previous evening’s MLB results. Not even – gasp! – the LeBron James free agency soap opera. Nope. It was that the injury to German captain Michael Ballack (he’d been chopped down in an egregiously dirty play in Chelsea’s FA Cup final win against Portsmouth) was going to keep him out of the Cup.

Think about that for a second. It’s SportsCenter. The top story is that the German captain has been ruled out of the World Cup. This was certainly the 7th Sign. All across America walls were bleeding, velvet Elvises were crying, storm clouds were gathering over deserted soccer fields, fallen angels were materializing in truck stop restrooms with cryptic messages for the Earth’s leaders…

Still, if you’ve been paying attention, you realize that most American media outlets have been taking futbol a lot more seriously of late, and ESPN never misses a chance to inject some goal or another into its plays of the day. ESPN’s interest is obvious – they televise MLS and have picked up the contract to carry Premiership games in the UK (some of which make their way onto ESPN2 HD), and we can probably expect more of this during the coming season.

If the US team earns some glory on the field in South Africa, then perhaps it justifies some of the hype in the mind of Joe Footballfan (who probably even played soccer as a kid, and who’ll perhaps watch a team that makes him feel good about himself before he will one that finds a way to lose to a nation he can’t even find on a map). If the Americans flame out (like they did four years ago), though, ESPN is going to realize a lot less from its investment that it might otherwise.

So best of luck to Landon and Gooch and Jozy and Tim and the Bradley family and the rest of the boys wearing those goddamned awful Nike uniforms. The fate of American marketers rests with your speed, your power and your courage.

Okay, maybe that’s a tad snide.

We all know that if soccer ever becomes the national pastime, it won’t be anytime soon. But there’s plenty of room in this country for the growth of such an engaging sport, and I can easily imagine soccer being a bigger deal in terms of revenues and ratings than hockey is (not hating on hockey here – I wish it were a bigger deal nationwide, as well).

I love the game, and don’t see any reason why you have to choose between soccer and football. We can love all of it, you know? (Isn’t that what America is about? All of it. Hell, that ought to be in the Pledge of Allegiance.) And American success in South Africa moves us a few more steps down that road.

So best of luck to our team – may they stand us all proud over the next couple of weeks…

It wasn’t the first time in this game that there were odd calls – all going against the US – in and around the Slovenan box. One play Dempsey was wrestled to the ground in the box, no call. On another, he was body check as Altidore got off a snap shot. Altidore was blocked off just outside the box by the last defender that only drew a yellow card. One earlier decision saw Altidore thrown down this time near the midway line only to find the infraction whistled on the American. You might think the ref just plain didn’t like the United States.

Its not as if this is the first time this has happened to the US team in a World Cup. We all remember the truly shocking no call in the 2002 quarterfinal against Germany when Torsten Frings made a brilliant save with his left hand. The only problem is that Torsten Frings is a midfielder, the German goalie was cleanly beaten. Penalty and red card. Except not that time. Flash forward four years to the final group game for the US against Ghana when we needed a win to go through. After another slow start the US had equalized when a poor clearance from Bocanegra at left back towards the top of the box. Gooch and a Ghanaian attacker go for the ball, the Ghanaian player goes down, penalty. Ghana covert, go up 2-1 and that is that.

Let’s begin by acknowledging that every word of that Gude describes here is accurate. The US team has been on the wrong end of its share of bad calls, and some of them have been critically damaging. These aren’t the rantings of a blind American homer, either – observers from around the world are saying the same things about the infamous disallowed third goal, and you’re going to see FIFA quietly admit it tomorrow, too, when they send the ref (Mali’s Koman Coulibaly) home.

But Gude goes a step further, suggesting that there’s something more than garden-variety bad officiating at work. He suspects a broader anti-American conspiracy, although he doesn’t phrase it quite that way.

This piece of his analysis needs a closer look. For starters, Gude isn’t some typical American football fan who just watched his first soccer game. As his bio explains, he’s an active ambassador for the game (it probably isn’t fair to hold his love of Liverpool against him in this context). So we’re dealing with an informed opinion.

Which is why I’m a little perplexed. Because if you’ve watched as much top-flight international soccer and international competition as Gude has, by now it ought to be clear that bad refs are the rule, not the exception. Yes, we got hosed, but isn’t just the US. Go ask Germany about the inexplicable red card on Miroslav Klose in the Serbia match, for instance. This tournament alone has already seen three or four examples of officiating so bad it’s hard to understand how the referees were selected for the most prestigious tournament in the world. Did I say three or four? The Bleacher Report digs even deeper.

This is the best FIFA has to offer?

Well, not exactly. You find the best refs in the countries with the highest level of play, as a rule, but in a global tournament there’s, shall we say, a political mandate to be as inclusive as possible. I saw nothing in Mr. Coulibaly’s performance to suggest that he could get a job calling rec league games in Aberdeen. So the structure of the tournament itself opens the door to a certain amount of risk – I mean, you can’t have all the games called by Brits, Italians, Spaniards and Germans. (And even if you could, you’d still have problems: the Germany-Serbia ref was Spanish and who can forget the colossal blunder of English official Graham Poll, who in the 2006 Cup issued three yellow cards to a Croatian player without sending him off?) Some of the problem is explained by the fact that soccer is a complex, fast-paced game that’s simply hard to ref (and I say this as a guy who has called more than 1,000 games in his life). Some of it, but by no means all of it. It’s hard, but it isn’t that hard.

The bottom line, for better or worse, is that tragic officiating is as much a part of the game as the goal kick. Period. As a result, it’s difficult to see that the American team has any special claim on injustice.

Now, all that said, it’s true that US soccer doesn’t get much respect from the rest of the world. Part of that owes to the fact that we haven’t earned a lot of respect with our skill (although that’s getting a little better in recent years). We’re just not as good as much of the rest of the world. This isn’t our game – around the globe kids have a soccer ball on their feet before they leave the crib, but here it’s our fifth or sixth choice. We get the same level of respect in soccer as we accord the Brits in basketball, and for the same reasons. Know what? That’s fair.

I also have no doubt that part of the dynamic is political. There are many nations around the world with no real reason to love us, and that carries over into sport. But does this indicate the existence of an anti-American bias by officials? Especially since, as noted above, it’s hard to demonstrate that we have it any worse than anybody else?

I’ve never seen the calls that have gone against us in the Cup as politically motivated (although I dread CONCACAF qualifiers – the basic level of officiating talent in this region is bad to start with and if you’re looking for places where people aren’t 100% in love with all things American, Latin America ain’t a bad place to start). There have been international matches where I knew we were going to get zero calls as a result of the where the ref was from but I’ve always chalked this up to soccer culture, not politics. And I can’t overstate the power of soccer culture – how the game is played is an expression of national identity and pride, and these things are often beyond irrational. I’ve been on the pitch with plenty of people who didn’t have anything against us politically, necessarily, but who hated our guts where the game was concerned.

Back to Gude’s suspicion that the calls against us are, shall we say, targeted. It’s possible – politics and sport don’t always play nice with each other, and those who remember our Olympic boycott and the travesty of the 1972 Olympic basketball final don’t need to have this explained to them.

But I have a basic rule when it comes to assessing conspiracy theories: never chalk up to conspiracy that which can be easily explained by basic incompetence. After all, incompetence is humanity’s greatest natural resource, and soccer refs, as a group, tend to have far more than their share. In the US-Slovenia match, all you had to do was look at Mr. Coulibaly’s face to see how utterly out of his depth he really was. He didn’t need to hate America to blow that call. Cluelessness sufficed.

Gude may be right, but for the time being I need more evidence. Please, I pray to the soccer gods, do not show it to me Wednesday in our match vs. Algeria…