FIFA drew the groups for next year’s World Cup today, and the United States caught a stroke of luck in avoiding not only a “group of death” but also in getting matches against two of the weaker opponents in the field. The United States will open against England on June 12th, face Slovenia on June 18th, and finish against Algeria on June 23rd. In my humble opinion England is one of the seeded teams most vulnerable to getting picked off by a decent side, Slovenia qualified only thanks to a playoff win against Russia, and Algeria is regarded as the weakest of the five African teams to qualify (other than S. Africa, the host.) So the likely result is a win against Algeria, a win against Slovenia, and a loss against England. But it’s not outside the realm of reason to imagine the U.S. getting a draw or a win against England. Of course, neither is it outside the range of possibility for the U.S. to draw or lose against either Algeria or Slovenia given some of their past World Cup performances. But I remain optimistic that this team, which stunned the world in their Confederations Cup performance this past summer, can do well in this group and make it out of the first round and into the knockout stage (where they might even face a re-match against Germany out of Group D.) The United States must perform of course, and this is a team capable of wild inconsistency. But overall this is an excellent result for the United States, and bodes well for a most pleasurable World Cup appearance next summer.

UPDATE: Grant Wahl, with more on the USA’s good fortune.

UPDATE II: An article from the NY Times, and Nate Silver, whose new rankings system gives the United States a 19% to win the group, but a 48% of advancing.

1. Nicholas Kristof, on how Republican have been scare-mongering Americans into voting against their own interests for eighty years now. History has proven them wrong, every single time.

2. Perhaps you heard about the “Hand of Frog” that secured France a berth in the World Cup over poor Ireland. Ireland’s petition to FIFA for a replay has been denied, proving that FIFA is an organization mired in the past, both rejecting modern instant replay technology and favoring the world’s powerhouses (particularly the Western ones) over the rest of the world.

3. No one sitting on death row in Texas can expect any sort of clemency from Gov. Perry right now…the man has a primary to win!

4. Short-term lenders in Texas are getting what they pay for with their campaign contributions: zero regulation. As I have said before and will say again, our democracy will forever be corrupted by money until the Supreme Court wises up and decides that money is not the exact equivalent of speech, or political campaigns become publicly funded.

…against my better judgment. But still, this NY Times article about Elizabeth Lambert, a soccer player for the University of New Mexico, bothers me for several reasons. I ran across the YouTube video of Lambert’s extremely aggressive (that is, downright dirty) play in a game against Brigham Young via the various soccer blogs I like to follow. The only thought I had watching it was that she seemed like an extraordinarily aggressive player, who probably should have been tossed out of the game at some point. The play of one female college soccer player hardly seems to merit news coverage, so I was a bit surprised to see a major paper address this issue. But it appears the YouTube video garnered Lambert some mostly unwarranted and completely unnecessary coverage and criticism:

Lambert said she was shaken and appalled by some of the responses she received in e-mail messages, telephone messages and on blogs, which included the publishing of her parents’ home phone number in Southern California and one suggestion that “I should be taken to a state prison, raped and left for dead in a ditch.”

What on Earth? I don’t really feel why anybody thinks it’s necessary to dig up the e-mail address of a female college soccer player so they can send her a nasty message about the highlights of her play in one particular game, or why anyone would publish her private information so anonymous idiots can call and leave hateful and threatening messages. Lambert herself thinks she knows why the incident has garnered so much attention:

“I definitely feel because I am a female it did bring about a lot more attention than if a male were to do it,” Lambert said. “It’s more expected for men to go out there and be rough. The female, we’re still looked at as, Oh, we kick the ball around and score a goal. But it’s not. We train very hard to reach the highest level we can get to. The physical aspect has maybe increased over the years. I’m not saying it’s for the bad or it’s been too overly aggressive. It’s a game. Sports are physical.”

[...]

She said she was taken aback at how the incident had been perceived by some as sexy catfighting between two women. She said she was aghast that some men had sent her messages saying, “Hey, we should meet up some time.”

“That appalled me,” Lambert said. “A lot of people think I have a lot of sexual aggression. I was like, ‘Whoa, no, I don’t feel that way at all.’ That’s bizarre and shocking to me.”

I’d like to think she’s wrong, but I doubt it. As a frequent purveyor of soccer blogs and forums, I’ve come across some pretty appalling sexism that the poster felt no need to make anonymously (so confident was he of the rightness of his sexism and misogyny.) Male soccer fans can be dismissive of the female game, droning on and on about the lack of skill, speed, or athleticism (none of which is entirely true.) I’m sure some men saw that video and considered it proof as to why women’s soccer shouldn’t be accorded any respect. (I’m sure she has also been harassed by women as well, but I’m unqualified to speak as to what would motivate a woman to criticize another woman’s aggressive soccer play other than from a soccer perspective.)

I’m also bothered by the apparent “re-education” Lambert must apparently endure to win her way back on the team:

She is seeing a clinical psychologist on campus to better understand what caused the hair-pulling incident. It is one of several steps she is taking, along with speaking to youth players about acceptable behavior, so she can seek reinstatement to the team in the spring.

A clinical psychologist? Really?? If Lambert is to be believed, she was experiencing a frustrating game, and both teams were allowed to get out of control by an overly lenient ref (she is indeed elbowed in the stomach prior to punching a player in the back.) That sounds like a situation that’s ripe for a player to go off. I understand that we live in an age where people have to make public (if utterly shallow) amends for their bad behavior (especially if it winds up on blogs or YouTube) but I find myself wondering whether a male soccer player would be expected to see a psychologist. I’m sure there are more than a handful of punches thrown in men’s NCAA soccer every year, and I would be surprised to learn that even a single one of those instigators was expected to see a clinical psychologist even if that game were captured on ESPN like the New Mexico-BYU game. I can only speculate but it seems to me that Lambert has to publicly debase herself precisely because she got away with enough bad behavior to fill a YouTube video, and because she’s a woman and women just don’t play that way. Had she been red-carded after her overly aggressive tackle from behind at one point earlier in the game as she should’ve been, none of this would be a story.