Tuesday, December 20, 2022

World Cup 2022

The World Cup, a once every four year event to determine the champion of soccer, just finished this past Sunday. It is a national event, although many players play for club teams outside their own country. Even some US players are employed overseas in the more prestigious European leagues, a situation which leads to participants taking penalty shots against goalies that they are very familiar with, either from league matches or as teammates. The event that just ended was the men's tournament.

Before commenting on the final game, I thought it also important to mention the dark side of this year's World Cup. The host country Qatar, was chosen more than a decade ago by FIFA, the ruling commission of international soccer. At the time, the choice was very controversial, not the least because there were no large stadiums in which to play the matches. Generally, host countries must demonstrate they have the infrastructure in place before being awarded such an important event. 

Additionally, most World Cup tournaments are held in the summer, yet Qatar's summer weather is far too hot to have world class athletes competing in such a physically demanding sport. This is why the tournament was held in December, so that the temperature was acceptable for the participants, again, a concession to a host country that was unprecedented.

Also, the fact that Qatar does not have the best human rights reputation, resulted in a number of protests and boycotts, especially from the LGBTQ+ community, but also from women in general, since Qatar has only a slightly better record of treating women than its other Middle Eastern neighbors.

Finally, workers rights was seen as a black mark on the country, since, with the number of stadiums and accompanying buildings that needed to be constructed, immigrants were imported by the tens of thousands to provide the labor, often paid wages not in line with the difficulty of the work, and housed in poor shelters with inadequate room and sanitation facilities. 

Lastly then, many people claim there must have been some bribery and corruption within FIFA, to allow such an ill prepared country without much of a soccer reputation and with a questionable labor and human rights record to be the showcase for the most widely watched sporting event in at least 4 years, if not more.

Yes, America, football and the Super Bowl are popular with over 100 million people worldwide tuning in, but over 1 billion (that is billion) people watched this past Sunday's final match.

Still, and despite these obvious reasons why a Qatar boycott was justifiable, I caught a number of matches during the tournament, including the entirety of the final match between Argentina and France, the defending World Cup champion. And I was not disappointed. 

The game itself was remarkable.  The best player for Argentina, Lionel Messi, is one of the top 3 players in the world, but also at the end of his career, trying to win his first World Cup. On the other side, Kylian Mbappe, also one of the top 3 players in the world, was looking to cement his legacy as the best of today, and, by winning his second straight World Cup become only the second in history to win two by the age of 22, Pele having won 2 by his 21st birthday.

In other words, not only was there the drama of the World Cup itself, but history would be made regardless of who won. 

Now, many Americans disdain soccer as too slow and not enough scoring. I was fortunate enough to have played backyard soccer in my youth, and also to have known a few soccer enthusiasts who played in high school, and one who also played in college. Additionally, when I went to the Olympics in both 1976 and 1984, I saw multiple soccer matches, including one in the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, California. For those who have never been to an international soccer event, there is nothing like it, the constant cheering, singing, rise and fall of the crowd as the game progresses. 

Sunday's final match was the ultimate example. Argentina dominated the first half, ney, most of the first 75 minutes, yet, while substantial in soccer, only held a 2-0 lead, one of the goals belonging to Messi. 

Then, lighting struck as France scored twice in less than 2 minutes, both by Mbappe! When the game went to overtime, tied at 2, Argentina scored in the second 15 minute overtime, Messi with the lead goal, but since soccer overtime periods are not sudden death, France still had about 12 minutes to go. So, of course, Mbappe scored with just 2 minutes to go, making it 3-3. This would have been enough excitement, except that both teams had excellent chances to score in those last few minutes, France especially being thwarted by an unbelievable save in close by the Argentine goalie.

So, off to penalty kicks. Now, again, some Americans don't like penalty kicks to decide such an important season ending match, but watching a world class soccer striker stare down a goalie from only 12 yards away, each attempting to out psyche the other, is tense. Each knows the others' tendencies, which corner the striker likes to aim for, which side the goalie likes to guess for his lung. Multiplied by 5 players for each side, barring saves and misses, perhaps even more if neither side gains an advantage after the first five players.

In Sunday's finals, France won the toss and went first, analytics indicating that the team that goes first wins more than half the time. And, when Mbappe's shot found net, the choice looked good. But Messi evened the score with his penalty shot, then the Argentine goalie made an amazing save on France's second shot, and when the third French shooter missed the net, Argentina found itself up 3-1 after 3 rounds. France made in 3-2 but when the fourth Argentine shooter hit the back of the net, the celebration was on, and Messi had his first World Cup championship in his (perhaps) final match. Talk about going out on top! Perhaps Tom Brady should have spoke to him after winning Super Bowl 55.

As I have said before, I enjoy watching sports, having passed my playing days, backyard and otherwise, many years ago. Sports, when done right, can help develop team goals, teach graceful winning as well as losing, create long lasting friendships, and, sometimes, even bring nations and people together when other topics do not. But there is far too much money in sports today, which bothers me greatly, as I see money's influence tarnishing sports itself, and bashing the concepts I refer to above as the positives of physical competition. 

Is there hope? The fact that a country like Iran still sent its soccer team to the competition, and that some competing teams felt, at least for a few weeks, an affinity to those men who were just like them, just living in a different country, is the kind of thing that sports can do. The fact that most likely, the choice of Qatar as the host country was influenced by power and money, takes away from that accomplishment. 

In the end, whether it is the face of a 10 year old peewee football player who just scored his first touchdown, or that of a 35 year old man who won his last international competition, the joy that sports can create for the victorious, and the tears for those who didn't win, is priceless when followed by a shared ice cream cone, winners and losers, at the local DQ, or a beer by competing rugby teams at the local pub. 

It is the shared humanity of fair and tough competition with respect for each other,  and the shared act of having left it all out on the field that makes sports worthwhile, and as long as that stays in the forefront of the innumerable games that take place in the thousands of communities worldwide, it is what will continue to make our ball fields and pitches the place where life lessons can be taught to our kids. And, even more critically, (hopefully) remembered by adults when competing in those adult arenas of work and relationships and politics.     

  

Thursday, December 8, 2022

A last look at the Midterm Elections, and a look forward

With Senator Warnock's victory in holding his Senate seat, it is time to put this election cycle behind us, and look for lessons for the 2024 campaign.

First, although scant time remains before the end of the current federal legislative term, I would hope that the Dems can propose and pass some type of election reform that attracts a few GOP representatives who are interested in preserving our democracy. Nothing fancy, but certainly, at the least, laws that specify the role of the Vice President in certifying the electoral counts, and that require states to honor the votes of the citizens (no alternate electors). And, if possible, federal baseline standards that require some sort of early in-person voting, automatic mail-in ballots to be distributed for the general election when a voter participates in the primary of that year, automatic approval of a request for a mail in ballot (no reason needed), and perhaps a drop dead receipt date for mail-in and absentee ballots, say the actual day of the election, although I would want this requirement to be a part of a state's extended in-person voting. 

In my decades of political discourse with friends and family, making voting easier was never a partisan issue. GOP and Dem alike almost to a person thought that retaining Tuesday as voting day was absurd, weekend long availability being the most common opinion, and eliminating the obstacles to requesting a mail-in ballot being second most popular.  When my wife and I applied for our mail-in ballots this past election cycle, a reason needed to be offered. Why? My right to vote should not require a reason to be given if I want to vote via the mail. 

And, now that I have done it twice, I find voting by mail to be much better. Receiving a ballot up to a month before election day gave me  much more time to research the candidates, in addition to not having to worry about the weather, unexpected sickness within the family, work related issues, long lines at the polls, or any other of the innumerable reasons why someone might encounter an obstacle to voting, especially when there is no early voting option. 

For consistency, I reread my first post related to the mid terms, which you can read using the link below.


One interesting tidbit that you may have missed, is that with Warnock's victory, this was the first mid term in about 80 years that the party holding the White House did not lose a Senate seat. In this case, the Dems gained one with the flipping of the PA Senate seat to John Fetterman.  As for the House, the GOP gained 9 seats, from a minority position of 213 to a 4 seat majority of 222. (218 is needed for control). Certainly, good news for those in the GOP who wish to derail any other legislative efforts by Biden in the next 2 years, but no where near the landslide that was expected as recently as 6 months ago. 

To put this into perspective, in the last 11 midterms which encompass 1 Biden term, 1 Trump term, 2 Obama terms, 2 GW Bush terms, 2 Clinton terms, 1 Bush term and 2 Reagan terms, only GW Bush in his first term and Clinton, in his 2nd term, didn't lose House seats. The other 9, including Biden this year, lost an average of just under 31 seats. Biden's 9 puts him just behind Reagan's second midterm of 5, and the first Bush who lost 8. By contrast, Obama lost 63 seats (a true red wave) in his first term, Clinton lost 52 in his 1st term, Trump lost 40, GW Bush lost 30 in his 2nd term, Reagan lost 26 in his first term and Obama lost 13 in his 2nd term. 

So, despite the highest inflation in 40 years (since Reagan's first term), in this years midterm election cycle, the Dems lost the least amount of House seats in a midterm since 2002, and gained a Senate seat for the first time since 1962 when JFK gained a 3 total seats. 

Why?

Well, clearly, the Supreme Court's decision to return women's reproductive rights to the individual states had a lot to do with it. But also, as Mitch McConnell alluded to back in November, candidate quality also mattered. A lot! No better indicator of that reason is the Georgia Senate race where the GOP candidate under-performed as compared to the GOP Governor candidate by 200,000 votes, then lost by about 100,000 votes in the runoff, an increase in deficit when compared to his loss by about 37,000 votes in the original election. 

And who hand picked that Georgia Senate candidate? Like the word loser, his last name also has 5 letters. As I said in my original post, it is past time for the GOP to jettison its association with the former president. This is especially important in light of the fact that in 2024, the Dems must defend multiple Senate seats that they hold in red or purple states. It is clearly possible for the GOP to retake the Senate in 2024, but only if they run candidates that are not beholden to the former president's lies and treasonous actions. Like this election cycle, there will be seats to take back, but only if they choose candidates that can put two cogent sentences together, who believe in a women's right to choose, and who believe in election results even when they lose. 

In the meantime, inflation will continue to cool. While a recession is still a possibility, by November 2024, economic hardships may not be as prevalent as they were this year. This makes it even more critical for the GOP to acknowledge that they got what they wanted from their 2016 presidential election win (a 6-3 seat majority on the Supreme Court), but need a new direction if they want to win the White House.  

I firmly believe that the current GOP agenda has little to do with governing and more to do with an emphasis on grievance and culture war issues. We will see how this plays out in the next 2 years in the House; will there be bills passed which address our national problems, or will it be 2 years of interminable hearings and posturing. If the latter, that will make it all the more easy for the Dems to fend off further legislative losses. While I believe that more people lean right than left, I also believe that more people want effective government, and want their public servants to pass laws that help the everyday American citizen, not just the rich or influential.

Like life, politics is cyclical although sometimes the cycles lag behind what is needed on Main Street. Regardless of the party you prefer, we need to demand from our public servants that they put us, the 90% of people who can not buy TV ads to voice our opinions or send our lobbyists to DC, front and center.  

The majority of Americans believe in freedom for all, including women to control their reproductive lives, and all Americans to marry whomever they love, to worship the god of their choice, and to use birth control, but even more importantly, to not pass laws that discriminate against others in the name of one particular religion. 

Whichever party embraces these basic rights, is the one which, hopefully, will win more then they lose, both in 2024 and moving forward.