Op-Ed \ Andrew Rogers

World Cup is here, does anything else matter?

DJ: Mr. Rogers, this is the worst case I've seen in years and I've been a practicing doctor since 1966.

AR: Fair enough Doctor Johnson. What is the prognosis, bottom line?

DJ: At best, I would give you four-to-five weeks. In the worst case scenario, you might never recover. Please listen Mr. Rogers, WCF (World Cup Fever) is a serious condition. Have you spoken to your company boss?

AR: I think I'll take my chances on a 20-year-old with a dodgy metatarsal and a mentally fragile coach who can't trust his long-term partner or bosses. Now where's that prescription for the organic, health conscious Doritos, dips and beer?"

In Europe, and increasingly the United States, the World Cup is seen as an encompassing experience where everyone can get together and enjoy the occasion in the knowledge that it is only a game. . . Well, kinda.

The wall chart is out, the groups draw and permutations have been analyzed and I feel we could see a repeat of the 2002 final in which Brazil defeated Germany with a quirk of fate assisting Germany to the prize.

Looking across the various geographical regions, it is more patent than ever that there are no longer any games where a side can assume they can just turn up. Most teams have a star performer or a combined strength that must be respected, or sides could run the risk of being dumped out of the tournament as illustrated by Portugal and France in 2002.

In Europe, the contenders appear to be Germany, The Netherlands and Italy. Germany as home nation has a considerable advantage, allied with tournament record that has seen them outside of the last 8 only once since their first triumph in 1954. Irrespective of any negative conjecture, the fact remains they can compete when it matters.

The Netherlands has quality throughout the side, but historically lacks the killer instinct. There is little to suggest this will change, but given the historical realities that go beyond my generation, it will be extremely determined and motivated.

Italy can compete against anyone and will not be intimidated by Brazil. The only real concern with regard to performance will be the fact that it basically has to play the equivalent of three quarterfinal matches to get out of Group E and this will take something out of it.

England has the caliber of players and experience to feel at ease against the best. However, as previously suggested on these hallowed pages, it needs to be able to retain possession of the ball. Most goals seem to come from counterattacking play and set pieces.

The dividing line between winning and losing in the World Cup can be broken down into split seconds and inches. Had Sergio Conceicao's shot gone in off the inside of the post for Portugal versus South Korea in 2002 the United States would not have gone through. This time around, I do not expect any of the sides from the Asia or Oceania region to make in-roads, but anything can happen and probably will.

The term "dark horses" seems to have been coined for the African nations competing in the World Cup. I have little or no time for notions that teams such as Cameroon, Nigeria and Senegal were anything but accomplished sides with quality throughout the team. Accordingly, a little more should be expected from teams that so far have been congratulated for just competing than valiant failure. African football deserves better than this and anyone of the six competing teams can do some serious damage, although inexperience could be a factor this time around.

In South America, Brazil and Argentina again pose a strong challenge, although Argentina's chances are hindered by the quality of the opposition in its group. As for Brazil, it is formidable, maybe unassailable?

The Spain '82 side was mesmerizing. I'm not sure if there has been a better international side, but this team, like the '82 lineup, could suffer from overconfidence and must be wary of getting sucker-punched down a side alley with the world seemly at its feet.

The U.S. is in a group of very slow and painful death. . . in the desert with out any water. But with a stronger and more experienced roster than 2002, expectations are understandably high, but getting out of the group would be a success in itself. Talking to Alexi Lalas last week, he brought sound judgment and experience to the national team's World Cup debate: "Would it be a failure to not get out of the group in 2006? Yes. Would it be the end of the world? Absolutely not. There are plenty of good teams that have bombed out in the first round."

Should the Americans not make it out of the group, they would be in illustrious company. In 2002 alone, Portugal, France and Argentina missed the cut.

Andrew Rogers, a regular contributor to the United Kingdom's League Paper and Non League Paper, lives in Sunbury on Thames in England. Formerly the director of communications for the Long Island (N.Y.) Rough Riders, he is a UEFA 'B" license coach and plays semi-professionally with Spelthorne FC.

Do you have a comment on this story or something to say about soccer in general? Send us a letter.