Press Coverage: Daytime Soccer and Primetime Golf Delivering Big Time Drama

We're 10 days into the World Cup and, by this point, people have started to make up their minds about this whole "soccer thing" in America. Forced to cover the event, countless media folks spend their time writing and talking about the vuvuzelas or the lack of scoring or the ties in an effort to, frankly, undermine the enjoyment of those who actually like watching soccer. "I don't like it so it must be terrible. Let's complain about it!" And yes, I'm paraphrasing the sentiment from more sports editors and producers than I care to admit. Oh, and Rick Reilly's revolting ESPN.com column from a week ago. The first week of the World Cup can, indeed, be an acquired taste.

Then, every four years, something happens. Something every media person loves. Controversy! Take your pick, media. Do you like your controversy on or off the field? Let's take on the field first.

There's going to be controversy in every World Cup, and much of it comes from the incessant flopping of some teams — Italy, my ire is stuck on you — but who would have expected the most controversial call in the World Cup to include the American team?

The phantom foul on Maurice Edu's goal was, and will forever be, a devastating call for American soccer fans. But for American sportswriters, there's nothing better than controversy with a side of patriotism. Heck even Joe Posnanski, widely recognized as one of the country's best columnists, might have let the moment get the better of him. He draped the situation inside what he knows best — baseball — telling a story of a friend who went to a game for the first time, without knowing the rules or much about the sport, and ended up seeing Nolan Ryan's seventh no-hitter. Posnanski likens her experience to what Americans were feeling on Friday.

In the end, the draw gives the United States an excellent chance of advancing to the knockout round. If the U.S. beats Algeria, it probably will move on. But a victory would have given the U.S. an excellent chance to win the group. And a victory would have given a lot of people all across the country a moment to remember … and a story to tell when people asked, “So, when did you become a soccer fan?”

Instead, it will baffle a lot of people who wanted something to remember. And it will give a lot of people who didn’t like soccer in the first place a chance to say: “What the heck was that?”

The ratings have been incredible for ESPN so far, with Friday's match breaking the record for the most-watched soccer game (per household) in the company's history. Yet the numbers, including online viewers, were somewhere around six or seven million. Keep in mind that number is amazing for any event on at 9:30 a.m. on a Friday, but I'd venture to guess that most people watching were soccer fans, or at least have a general understanding of the World Cup. It's hard to believe anyone would be showing up at 9:30 a.m. on a Friday with new eyes.

Posnanski's right that our moment was taken away from us, but I'd be shocked if anyone watching would have become a soccer fan if Edu's goal was allowed, but left the game not a fan because it wasn't.

As Chris Fowler and Alexi Lalas discussed on ESPN post-match, FIFA loves controversy because it gets people talking. Had the USMNT come back from a two-goal deficit to win, it would have been an amazing moment in American soccer. Now, the controversy surely piqued the interest of a few more American converts.

So, it's not going out on a limb to suspect that the United States-Algeria match on Wednesday will, again, break every viewing record there is to be broken. The media, through this controversy, gets an "us against the world" story line, and it's finally not about whether or not soccer is boring.

I see England, I see France
Ah, now to the off-the-field controversy, which is so fantastic because it involves England and France, two nations that are so easy for Americans to root against. First, while England is in disarray after two ties that felt like losses, a win for the Three Lions will advance them to the second round. Is that the time for the old captain to create a power struggle?

That may have sounded pleasant and all, but don't be fooled by the accent. That is England's disgraced former captain, John Terry, telling the media that the veteran players are no fan of Fabio Capello's style, nor his decision to sit Joe Cole on the bench. Yet despite Terry's attempt at a coup, it doesn't seem like it worked. Per Richard Williams of The Guardian:

In terms of attempted coups, this one is right up there with New Labour's pre-election attempts to get rid of Gordon Brown, and it promises to end in a similar outcome. John Terry's premature announcement of an insurrection against Fabio Capello's regime briefly seemed like a spark of hope amid the gloom of England's World Cup campaign, before being casually extinguished by the first sign of official disapproval.

As another Guardian report explained, after telling the media that he and a group of players were going to speak up in their film session to express displeasure with Capello's style and decision making, a member of the staff convinced Terry not to say anything. Nor, per the report, did any other player. It's never good when it's easier to talk to the media about your coach than it is to actually talk to your coach. The media loves it though.

That drama, of course, pales in comparison to the situation in France's camp where players have been sent home for insubordination and now team staffers have quit after further confrontation with players.

That altercation was between French captain Patrice Evra and staffer Robert Duverne, and led to the resignation of French Football Federation director Jean-Louis Valentin. Ironically, this spat stems from Evra — and the rest of the players — upset that someone leaked news of Nicolas Anelka's halftime rant at French manager Raymond Domenech. Anelka was benched during the match, but only sent home after L'Equipe's story, leading Evra to believe it was planted in an effort to force the FFF's hand. The French team released a statement, which reads (in part, via Google Translator):

With this release, all players of the team from France, without exception, want to assert their opposition to the decision taken by the French Football Federation to exclude Nicolas Anelka group. If we regret the incident that occurred at halftime of the match between France and Mexico, we regret even more the disclosure of an event that belongs to our group and which is inherent in the life of a high level team.

For its part, the French Football Federation has at no time tried to protect the group. It has made a decision without consulting all the players, only on the basis of the facts reported by the press.

The members of the French team, complaining to the press about a decision that was made based on a report in the press. And people say soccer is boring.

NBC With A U.S. Open Hard Sell On Drama, Perspective
Expect the ratings to be huge for a major- primetime golf tournament with a leaderboard including Tiger Woods, Phil Mickelson and Ernie Els. Of course, none of those major champions won the U.S. Open this weekend, so was NBC concerned that people would change the channel once Tiger and Phil ran out of holes and backed out of contention?

Johnny Miller called at least three shots "the shot of his life" in a 15-minute span. Fine, a putt to get even on the last hole of a major for French journeyman Gregory Havret most likely is the putt of his life, but some of the gravitas of that statement is taken away when Miller had just said that about a putt for Graeme McDowell the hole before. Then, perhaps most egregiously, he suggested a few minutes earlier that Ernie Els — three-time major champion Ernie Els — would have to hit "the shot of his life" with his second on 18 to make eagle to hope for a playoff. He'd have to hit a good shot, yes, but the shot of his life seemed a wee-bit oversold.

Is that more, or less, of a hard sell than Dan Hicks suggesting that Havret's putt on 18 to put him in a tie for the title with McDowell sitting in the fairway (a putt Havret missed, by the way), "would be the biggest moment, certainly, in [France]'s golfing history … and sporting history, it'd be right up there."

It was a big putt, alright. I'm not sure how it would compare with the 1998 World Cup title, or even Yannick Noah breaking an almost 40-year drought at the French Open back in 1983, but it would have been big. So yes, Hicks could be right, and the French could have made Havret a hero had he won the tournament. Or, with the strife inside their World Cup camp, it might not have even been the lead story on the sports pages this week.

Good Or Bad, Get the Announcers Right
We spent much of last week's Press Coverage praising the job by the play-by-play men ESPN hired for the World Cup. They've done an absolutely fantastic job and have been, at times, bitingly critical of the officials, the players and anything that warrants disparaging discussion. They've been so good, even political pundit Joe Scarborough took notice:

I agree with Martin Tyler. The Italians' flopping is "deeply pathetic," #worldcup

The Italian flopping was deeply pathetic. Unfortunately, Ian Darke was on the call, and the announcer who made the comment, not Tyler. Darke was also on the call for the USMNT match against Slovenia, so American fans should be well versed in his ability to be critical.

Confusing Tyler and Darke would be like confusing Pat Summerall with Kevin Harlan. Or, more aptly put, comparing Scarborough's commentary with that of Keith Olbermann. The styles are completely different. Alas, Tyler and Darke have a similar accent, so it's all the same, right?

Scarborough isn't the first member of the media to confuse the different British voices ESPN has employed. It's fine to applaud them, or chide them, for their work during the World Cup. Let's just try to find out who is actually doing the game, first.

This post originally appeared on the Sporting Blog. For more, see The Sporting Blog Archives.