1. About.com
  2. Sports
  3. World Soccer

A Look Back at the Confederations Cup Winners and Losers

From Joshua Robinson, About.com Guide   June 29, 2009

Follow me on:

Even if the tournament means very little in the grand scheme of things, the Confederations Cup has provided an entertaining two weeks of soccer in the middle of June — which was certainly a pleasant distraction from transfer rumors and the soccer-free boredom of early summer. And, if nothing else, it did certain players and teams a world of good. But a few others may look back and feel they were better off staying home. Here are some of the Cup's winners and losers.

Winners

  • US Soccer earned a huge amount of respect by making it to the final and hanging with Brazil for at least the first half. The second was not as strong, to say the least. But their performance against Spain in the semifinal certainly ranks among the team's greatest ever victories, right up there with beating England at the 1950 World Cup and their 3-2 win against Portugal during the group stage of the 2002 World Cup. There should also be a special mention for US goalkeeper Tim Howard who outdid himself, particularly in the last two games. Though he has not always looked so sturdy for Everton, his stock will skyrocket now after he was the main reason the US was ever in with a chance to beat Spain and Brazil.
  • Kaka was already a big winner before the tournament, but over the course of those two weeks, he showed that Real Madrid may not have been so foolish to pay 65 million Euros for him after all. (Well, it's still a little foolish.) But Kaka, named player of the tournament, proved that he is the consummate playmaker and can do everything to make a team click. Even in the final, he was at the center of Brazil's titanic second half onslaught.
  • A year ahead of their World Cup, South Africa came through its dress rehearsal with flying colors. It showed it was able to host an international tournament in several cities without any major incidents or snafus. Of course, nothing can match the scale of an actual World Cup and stadiums are still under construction, but it bodes well.
  • And let's not forget lowly Egypt. The champions of Africa went down swinging, scoring three goals against Brazil and upsetting Italy, all while trying to play some attractive soccer. They truly threw the group into havoc, making sure that Brazil and Italy were not a foregone conclusion to advance.

Losers

  • Defending World Cup champions Italy were absolutely woeful. Slumping to Egypt was one thing — upsets happen — but their thumping at the hands of Brazil, who should be their chief rivals heading into their title defense, was pitiful. With a place in the semis at stake, Italy simply surrendered with a whimper and lost 3-0, allowing the lucky Americans to make it through and cheating fans of a Spain-Italy matchup. Granted, the tournament meant little to them, but one would expect a stronger display from a team that should always be there or thereabouts when it comes to international competition.
  • FIFA was once again shown up in the final when Brazil was robbed of a goal when the ball crossed the line, but was missed by the linesman. Once again, there is a case for instant replay on goal-line decisions, but FIFA will likely continue to ignore it. Luckily for them, the goal did not change the result in the end. If it had, there would have been far more outcry and FIFA might have had to do something that actually reflected their motto, "For the good of the game."
  • As well as the US Soccer team played, this tournament was not completely positive for them. It virtually guarantees that Bob Bradley will be their coach through the World Cup, meaning another year and another tournament of unimaginative, defense-first soccer.

Comments

June 29, 2009 at 3:53 pm
(1) tommy sunshine :

Josh, I agree with you about technology but to say that FIFA would have changed the rules of soccer on the basis of a decision in the confederations cup is further proof that you have no idea about the game you are supposed to guide us on.

You seem to have a vendetta against Mr Bradley. His crime, it seems, is to encourage defensive football. But this is a curious objection. Arsenal played highly defensive football between 1981 and 1996.
Can you explain this?

June 29, 2009 at 6:46 pm
(2) Brent :

Tommy Sunshine keeps getting it wrong and Josh keeps getting it right. Technology needs to be brought into the game because most officials are useless. And Team USA needs to win. Respect isn’t enough. That means you lost!

Leave a Comment


Line and paragraph breaks are automatic. Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title="">, <b>, <i>, <strike>

©2012 About.com. All rights reserved. 

A part of The New York Times Company.