The woebegone

I’d hoped to write a long entry about Ecuador’s companions in misery in this World Cup. But, scanning the list, I found just two, maybe three, comparably disappointing teams: Türkiye (eliminated, having lost twice); Uruguay (nearly eliminated, having drawn twice); and Senegal (nearly eliminated, having lost twice). (I fancy Senegal’s chances against Iraq, however; I don’t fancy Uruguay’s against Spain.)

UPDATE: As I type, the South Koreans are losing to the South Africans; if the result holds, they’ll finish third in the group. And if they don’t scrape through in that position, it will be a tremendous disappointment.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

Other teams have been eliminated or soon will be, but none came into the tournament with the expectations of Türkiye, Uruguay, Senegal, or Ecuador (UPDATE: or South Korea). There’ve been no shocking breakthroughs (UPDATE: not unless the South Africans preserve their victory, anyway). But some teams have exceeded expectations on the field, if not in the standings. I tip my hat to the eliminated Panamanians. I tip it to Cape Verde and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, each of which may yet pull through. I tip it to New Zealand (in dire straits) and Iran (in straits slightly less dire).

I might be expected, for graciousness’s sake, to tip my hat to the Curaçaoans. But I won’t unless they acquit themselves against the Ivorians. Ecuador outplayed Curaçao, after all.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

More notes. This is turning out to be a World Cup for top-drawer strikers. Messi, Haaland, and Mbappé have astounded. Vinícius Júnior and CR7 have shown flashes, if less consistently. And the whole Dutch front line looks good.

Less famous but also excellent: Germany’s Deniz Undav; Morocco’s Ismael Saibari.

I couldn’t say the same for any of the defenses, except maybe Argentina’s – which is considered fragile by some pundits. (Nor have the Mexicans and Spanish conceded, but they hardly have been tested.) The best individual defensive performance was by Bosnia & Herzegovina’s captain, Sead Kolašinac, against Canada.

As late as yesterday, it was mathematically possible for Ecuador to win the World Cup without ever scoring. I told my brothers I’d gain pleasure from such an outcome. I don’t think they agreed. Their Internet silence was rather loud.

World Cup notes; body-text fonts, pt. 52: Fairfield (old and new), Fanwood, and Fanwood Text

Tuesday evening, we were without Internet. I couldn’t stream Norway’s first World Cup match since 1998 – Iraq’s first since 1986. Norway won, 4–1.

Then I missed Argentina’s brushing off of Algeria. Messi equaled Miroslav Klose’s scoring record. After his third goal, I relented and tuned in to Fox. The commentators asked how the Argentinians would motivate themselves. They played for Messi’s sake in 2022, they said, but now that Messi has won the World Cup, what will they play for?

It’s for such imbecilities that I avoid tuning in to Fox.

We reprogrammed our TV and, happily, gained offline access to Telemundo before the midnight match. I caught the Austrians’ first World Cup appearance since 1998. I went to sleep before they finished putting the Jordanian debutantes to the sword.

Iraq and Jordan were the first Asian teams to lose. Iran, on the previous night, salvaged a point against New Zealand. Humorists produced this headline: Kiwis Learn How Trump Feels after Stalemate with Iran (or words to that effect).

The French had a glorious second half against Senegal. Along with Argentina, they are the favorites (Spain failed to defeat Cape Verde). The French are frightening. They could win the tournament with just twenty good minutes in each game.

I have kind feelings but few words for: Belgium, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Uruguay, England, Croatia, Ghana, Panama, Colombia, and Uzbekistan. Their games were entertaining.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

Fairfield (des. Rudolph Ruzicka, 1949) was shortened and fattened by 1990s digitizers. This is what one comes across in, e.g., recent Norton Critical Editions:

(There is a lighter body-text weight.)

Compare with the original metal-type in Henry Hazlitt’s influential primer. This type has longer ascenders and descenders:

(More Hazlitt:

Actually, “in the long run we are all dead” is a problem for “longrunism.”)

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

The newer Fairfields may be easier to read at small sizes, but the original is more beautiful. Thankfully, the metal-type’s dimensions have been digitized as Fanwood (lighter) and Fanwood Text (darker).

The Fanwoods have no boldface. But they are free to download and use. And lovely. It’s gratifying to come across them in new books.

E.g., in Freida McFadden’s.

(Our sofa is like the cop’s.)

1996, the best year in movie history, pt. 14: Fly away home

Carroll Ballard has directed three fine movies about comunion between beasts and humans. The best, which everyone should see, is Never Cry Wolf (1983), in which a biologist, closely observing wolves, rediscovers his sense of childlike wonderment. The other two movies have children as protagonists. In The Black Stallion (1979), a boy and a horse are shipwrecked together on a tropical island; after they’re rescued, the boy becomes the horse’s racing jockey. And in Fly Away Home (1996), a girl (Anna Paquin) becomes a foster mother to some young geese.

This girl, a New Zealander, has just lost her mother and been brought to live with her father in his cluttered Ontario farmhouse. She isn’t very enthused about her father or her new school, but she enjoys the woods and fields. Her explorations give the camera a reason to linger over rural beauty.

Her father (Jeff Daniels) is a live-action version of a Hayao Miyazaki cartoon character. That is to say, he is an eccentric inventor, sculptor, and aeronaut. Flight is the theme of his creations. They include a gigantic metal dragon, a full-scale replica of the lunar landing module, and various leg-powered or motorized flying contraptions that he tests himself. He flies them well enough, but his landings are painful.

The inventor and his friends are full of sympathy for the girl, who is obviously lonely and frustrated (she wears her dead mother’s clothes around the house). But they are unable to earn her trust until another tragedy brings them under a common cause.

Some developers bulldoze a nearby woodland. Exploring the wreckage, the girl finds some abandoned goose eggs. She sneaks the eggs into a barn, incubates them, and watches the goslings hatch. Since she is the first creature they see, they regard her as their mother. They eat and bathe with her and follow her through the weeds and creeks and forests.

Only a broad-minded man would agree to have his house taken over by geese. The girl’s father doesn’t hesitate. By allowing his daughter to care for the geese, he helps her to come to terms with her mother’s death.

Eventually, however, it becomes clear that the geese must travel southward. It’s their instict; also, there are bureaucrats who’d destroy their habitat or even clip their wings. But without a mother to guide them, they’d never be able to find their way home.

And so the girl and her father decide to ride their aircraft to the south, over lakes and fields and skyscrapers, directing the geese in their migration.

Though all of this is fairly predictable, the movie isn’t on autopilot. Individual scenes play out in interesting ways, and certain passages evoke this biblical verse:

How think you? if a man has a hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, does he not leave the ninety and nine, and go into the mountains, and seek that which is gone astray?

(Substitute “geese” for “sheep.”)

There’s poignancy, also, in the father’s love for his daughter, and in the daughter’s engagement with the memory of her mother through her mothering of the geese. Best of all, though, is the lovely nature photography. The movie often feels like a nature documentary. It’s a bonus that an interesting human drama is happening in the background.

I list all the World Cup teams

Last night, I watched Peru defeat New Zealand, 2–0, to qualify for the World Cup. Earlier yesterday, Australia defeated Honduras, and the previous day, Denmark defeated the Republic of Ireland. And so the qualification cycle has ended.

Before I went to sleep, I recited all of the qualified teams to Karin:

Egypt
Morocco
Nigeria
Senegal
Tunisia

Australia
Iran
Japan
Saudi Arabia
South Korea

Belgium
Croatia
Denmark
England
France
Germany
Iceland
Poland
Portugal
Russia
Serbia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland

Costa Rica
Mexico
Panama

Argentina
Brazil
Colombia
Peru
Uruguay

Iceland (not Ireland) and Panama are first-time participants. Peru last reached this stage when I was less than a year old.

I have vivid World Cup memories of all the other teams.

Qualification, which has nearly ended

Africa completed its World Cup qualification cycle. These are the five successful teams: Egypt, Morocco, Nigeria, Senegal, and Tunisia.

In Europe, the Italians were knocked out by the Swedes. This was notable but not surprising. Since 2006, the Italians have underwhelmed.

The Northern Irish lost heartbreakingly against the Swiss. For analysis, I recommend an excellent video – “This Referee is Terrible. Never a Penalty. 12 Man Switzerland Beat Northern Ireland 1-0” – by YouTube user Themadmistake. (Karin told me not to link to this video. It has filthy language.)

The Greeks also failed to qualify, having lost to the Croatians.

Tomorrow, the Republic of Ireland will host Denmark in the culmination of yet another playoff series. And on Wednesday, Australia will host Honduras. In both these series, the initial matches were goalless.

The same was true of Peru’s first match against New Zealand. This series also will be decided on Wednesday, in Lima.

In the first game, in Wellington, the Peruvians were the vastly superior team. A timid team will bring the ball out of its own half by booting it through the air, and a good team will bring the ball upfield by performing a sequence of short passes. But the Peruvians brought the ball out simply by dribbling. The Kiwis were powerless to prevent this.

And yet the game was scoreless because the Kiwis packed all their players in front of their own goal.

Also, both teams were without their best strikers:

(1) The New Zealander Chris Wood, who was injured. He did make a rather terrifying appearance late in the second period.

(2) The Peruvian Paolo Guerrero, who’d tested positive for illicit drug use. As they say in Peru, Hoja de coca no es droga.

¡¡¡ Patada criminal !!!

My Facebook feed gives me all the minutest updates about the Ecuadorian national soccer team. As it should. … What’s remarkable is how these updates are titled. I’m reminded of the headlines of El Extra.

For example, Gabriel Achilier recently earned a red card in the Mexican league. The headline:

#LoÚltimo ¡¡QUÉ IMPRUDENCIA!!

¡¡PATADA CRIMINAL DE ACHILIER A UN RIVAL!! LO MANDARON A LAS DUCHAS … PERO QUÉ PATAZO …

MIRA EL VIDEO …

(In fact, it wasn’t a very serious foul.)

Of course, these days, most of the updates are concerned with the preparations for Ecuador’s last two World Cup qualifiers. (More precisely: these will be our last two qualifiers if we don’t finish in fifth place in South America; should we finish fifth, there would follow a two-game series against New Zealand.) Gustavo Quinteros, our manager, has been sacked. His replacement, Jorge Célico, has abandoned several regular players (e.g., Christian Noboa) and seen others abruptly retire (e.g., Felipe Caicedo). In their stead, he’s convoking rookies. I’m not necessarily in favor of dropping Noboa, but I welcome the influx of new talent. The old team had gotten far too predictable. The new players won’t have been scouted very thoroughly by our opponents.

Our next game, away to Chile, is on October 5 – Karin’s birthday. Karin isn’t very eager about this. I’ve tended to be sad on game days, lately.

UPDATE: Karin’s birthday is October 3, not October 5.

I knew that.

Mexico 2, Russia 1; Portugal 4, New Zealand 0; New York City FC 2, New York Red Bulls 0

Today’s Confederations Cup games were played simultaneously. I watched Russia vs. Mexico, which was shown on regular TV.

The Russians started well. Two of their attacks should have resulted in penalty kicks. Neither the referee nor the VAR system awarded any foul, however.

The Russians scored the first goal after a frantic sequence. One shooter struck the upright. Another saw his shot blocked. A third shooter missed the ball altogether. He did manage to slip the ball to the eventual goalscorer.

At that time, the Russians led the group. Things looked quite rosy for them. But then the Mexicans scored with a looping, headed shot.

In the second half, the Mexicans corrected their tactical imperfections. They scored again with another looping, headed shot. The assist came in high and long – all the way from the Mexican defense – and, as he lunged for the ball, the goalscorer was kicked in the chest by the Russian goalie.

VAR disallowed a third Mexican goal. … One of the best Russian players was red-carded. … The Russians looked very tired. … Finally, the whistle was blown, and the host nation was eliminated from the tourney.

At the same time, Portugal defeated New Zealand.

Then FOX showed an MLS contest between the New York Red Bulls and New York City FC. The announcers called it the “New York Derby.” Only, they didn’t say “Derby,” as in “Kentucky Derby”; they said “Darby,” which is how the English pronounce the word. They also talked about the “Texas Darby” – Houston vs. Dallas – as well as other MLS “Darbies.”

Wankers.

Portugal 1, Russia 0; Mexico 2, New Zealand 1

I was occupied with tutoring, and so I missed Portugal’s victory over Russia. It seems to have been a dull contest. The Portuguese scored early and then defended all the rest of the game.

I did get to watch Mexico vs. New Zealand, which was entertaining. In the first half, the Kiwis disrupted the Mexicans’ attacking rhythm. Also, Chris Wood, a truck of a forward, gave the Mexican defenders fits. He eventually scored a goal. The second half was very different. The Mexicans realigned themselves tactically; came out at full speed; and scored twice, due to the slipperiness of Javier Aquino, their tiny winger.

In stoppage time, the two teams got into quite a scuffle. The referee ordered a long break so he could consult the Video Assistant Replay system about whom to punish. I was licking my chops – I thought he’d give out several red cards – but he didn’t give out any.

Russia vs. New Zealand

I was eager to watch this game.

Gone from my thoughts was the flaccid Russia of last year’s Euros.

Gone was the blundering Russia of the 2014 World Cup, whose players, under Capello, were fearful.

I hoped to see the slick Russia of the 2012 Euros, the Russia that put four goals past the Czech Republic (before being dumped out of that tourney by the Greeks).

New Zealand, I thought, would be the ideal victim for such a Russia.

Unfortunately, I missed the first half. I got the kickoff time wrong and turned the game on rather late.

The Russians were ahead, 1–0, but only because New Zealand had scored for them. Empty seats blighted the stadium in St. Petersburg. From his V.I.P. box, Putin cast an irritated scowl.

As I watched, it became clear that these Russians were no better than, say, Peru. (The FIFA rankings have them beneath Venezuela, but that’s not right.)

The Kiwis were vastly worse, though. They looked like a team of schoolboys. Their only standout was their goalie, who made some startling saves. (His club, in Germany, is in the third division, and so I hope that this tourney brings him wider notice.)

But the onslaught could not be held back. Around the 70th minute, a neat maneuver resulted in a tap-in for the Russians. Such was what I’d hoped to see.

Yet another Confederations Cup

It used to be that in each four-year cycle, the world would get to peek at an Oceanian team only twice: (1) during a brief World Cup qualification playoff, which the Oceanian team would lose; and (2) during the Confederations Cup.

This year, however, there are two traditional Oceanian teams in the Confederations Cup: New Zealand and Australia. The latter team defected to Asia some years ago and recently won the championship of that continent. But we all know better. Australia is not in Asia.

An honorary third Oceanian contestant is Chile, by virtue of its claims upon Easter Island and Antarctica.

Like Oceania, Europe supplies three contestants: Russia, Portugal, and Germany. The field is rounded out with Mexico and Cameroon.

So much for the contestants. Now, their division into groups.

A: Mexico, New Zealand, Portugal, and Russia.

B: Australia, Cameroon, Chile, and Germany (this is the Group of Death).

Notice that alphabetically Group B has the first four teams, and Group A has the last four. This is appropriate, just as it is that an Oceania-heavy tourney should be played in Russia. It’s the World Turned Upside-Down.

I plan to report on this important tourney.