World Cup: Adidas Is All In With Argentina And Germany

 

All in or nothing.  It is the phrase that adidas has lived by leading up to and through the 2014 World Cup in Brazil.  Today, the phrase bears much more significance than it did at the start of the games.  Four teams remain going into the Semi-finals and two wear adidas uniforms (Argentina and Germany) while the other two (Brazil and Netherlands) sport Nike outfits.  Adidas was determined to go “all in” with the 2014 World Cup and give Nike a run for its money; it now has a real chance to show off its product with a potential World Cup winner.

The battle between an adidas willing to go all in or nothing and Nike’s “risk everything” campaign is for a larger share of the soccer industry.  It is estimated that the brands combine to control roughly 70% of the market.  Despite Nike’s dominance over adidas in revenue from sales of sportswear across the world (Nike’s $25 billion in revenue versus adidas’ $20 billion in revenue), adidas is believed to have brought in approximately $500 million in soccer-related revenues above Nike in 2013.  Nike keeps inching closer to adidas in soccer, a sector of sport historically set aside for adidas to conquer.  Thus, it is truly all in or nothing for adidas.

With Germany matching up against Brazil and Argentina playing the Netherlands, there could be an all-adidas Final on July 13.  It would be a major coup for adidas, which sponsored nine of the thirty-two teams originally competing in the 2014 World Cup, compared to Nike’s leading ten sponsorships.  It is not at all surprising that Germany and Argentina are among the best sellers (there were more than two million Germany jerseys sold by June 24); however, that adds significance to the importance of their success in the Semi-final round.

Nike may promote that it has risked everything with the World Cup, but the statement has more significance when applied to adidas.  The brand has manufactured every soccer ball used in the World Cup since 1970 and recently extended its partnership with FIFA to last through 2030 at a reported $70 million for every four years to maintain the relationship.  It is the company behind “brazuca”, the official match ball of the 2014 World Cup in Brazil, which was tested for two-and-a-half years by more than 600 of the world’s top players before being introduced to the public in December 2013.

    Here you can see Messi impressed with my moves. #ballin #ARG pic.twitter.com/01mVVb0u2L

    — brazuca (@brazuca) July 5, 2014

Adidas also spends significant money in the sponsorship of important players on both Argentina and Germany.  It markets a Lionel Messi signature collection of footwear and apparel, including a new signature cleat, and also sponsors German footballer Bastian Schweinsteiger.  Messi reportedly earns $3.34 million per year from his deal with adidas.  Partnerships with individual players are not reserved to those who serve on teams sponsored by adidas.  The brand also has deals in place with Netherlands stars Robin Van Persie and Arjen Robben.

Argentina has been associated with adidas since 1974 and a 2011 contract ensures that their partnership will last at least through December 2022.  The extension has an annual value of $11 million.  It is believed that adidas is paying $37 million per year to sponsor Germany.

Adidas is the global leader in soccer.  It is determined to sustain the status quo.  At this stage of the 2014 World Cup, the phrase “all in or nothing” has garnered added significance.  Adidas has spent millions of dollars to capture the attention of the world.  A victory by Argentina or Germany will add a major reward for the brand that continues to truly risk everything on the sport of soccer.
Darren Heitner is a lawyer and the Founder of South Florida-based HEITNER LEGAL, P.L.L.C., which has a focus on Sports Law and Entertainment Law.

Why Neymar, Scolari and Brazil All Face Unprecedented Challenges

When the 2016 summer Olympics was awarded to Rio de Janeiro in 2009 it was over two years after FIFA had confirmed Brazil as the host nation for the 2014 World Cup Finals. At the time anyone questioning the wisdom of having the two largest sporting events in the world hosted in the same country in just two years were pointed towards Mexico (summer Olympics 1968, World Cup Finals 1970) and West Germany (summer Olympics 1972, World Cup Finals 1974) as successful examples.

(How successful these events were is open to debate given that an undetermined number of student demonstrators were shot and killed by Mexican authorities just 10 days before the ’68 Olympics started and four years later in Munich there was the terrorist attack that resulted in 17 deaths – 11 Israelis, one German policeman and 5 members of Black September.)  

Nonetheless, such a simplistic comparison fails to consider the vast difference in scale and scope of these two events over the last four decades and the complexity in not only presenting the events to a world-wide audience numbered in the billions but also the logistical challenge of moving hundreds of thousands of people often over vast distances and also ensuring their care and comfort along the way and upon their arrival.  

The hosting of these events will test Brazil to an unparalleled degree and it will involve the mobilization of thousands of workers and volunteers. But while the massive workforce and bureaucracy sets about building airports, stadiums, roads, rail connections and hotels they will also have one overriding concern – will Brazil win next summer’s FIFA World Cup?

The performance of the Brazil national team is so central to the psyche of the nation that many feel that the scars of losing when the country first hosted the World Cup in 1950 still remain raw and close to the surface. Most countries would consider that one loss, no matter how painful, to be more than offset by their five World Cup wins – the most by any country. But not apparently Brazil.

To compound the concern of Brazilians the hosting opportunity comes at a time when the international standing of the Brazil team has plummeted to levels not seen since before the Second World War. Other great soccer playing nations have experienced the same lack of synchronicity. Spain, Italy and Germany have all lifted the World Cup but they also failed when they hosted in 1982, 1990 and 2006.

When Brazil plays the well-worn clichés are pulled out and dusted off – “Jog0 bonito”, “Samba football or “the Beautiful Game” are the most common – and are often used extravagantly to describe Brazil’s style and panache. The problem is that unless you have been living under a rock for the last thirty years it should be pretty obvious that Brazil has traveled a long way off-road since the great sides of 58, 62 and 70.

Or may be the continued existence of such stereotypes is testament to how great these sides actually were.  

The last Brazil team to “fit the brand” was in 1982 and that team is remembered for potential-unfulfilled rather than for any success they achieved. 

The teams since then have been built on functionality and pragmatism. There have been stars – Romario in 1994, Ronaldo in 1998 and in 2002 he was joined by Rivaldo and Ronaldinho – but they have also been the embellishments to an army of well drilled and technically competent players who knew their respective jobs and carried them out. 

In fairness, many have made a convincing case (Jonathan Wilson for example) that after the defeat by Italy in 1982 Brazil was forced to accept that “system” soccer had triumphed and the stark choice was between irrelevance and adaptation.   

Adaption it was and on Saturday, Brazil took a small step towards the goal of hosting a successful World Cup (and that much includes winning it) when they faced Japan in the opening game of the 2013 Confederations Cup.

The Confederations Cup started in 1997 and for the longest time it was unloved and largely an unwanted biennial competition. Actually, it was more than unloved it was pretty much despised as a superfluous international tournament in an already overcrowded schedule.

In 2001 the tournament took a first tentative step towards legitimacy when it became the test event for the 2002 World Cup Finals jointly hosted by Japan and South Korea. The eight team tournament offered the host nations an opportunity to test some of their operations under less stressful circumstances. It was something that well-managed hosts had endeavored to do anyway and so hosting the Confederations Cup killed two birds with one stone.

The fact that it also offered broadcasters more television inventory when FIFA came calling was also a positive.

A tournament was already in the works for France in 2003 but since then the competition has been limited to once every four years and it has been hosted by the upcoming World Cup Finals host – Germany 2005, South Africa 2009 and now Brazil 2013.   

Brazil’s performance on Saturday was one that encouraged cautious optimism although Japan offered such docile opposition that a more informed assessment will have to wait for another day and for more strident opposition.  

Brazil Coach Luiz Felipe Scolari was also the man that led Brazil to the World Cup win of 2002 has consistently characterized this Brazil team as a “work-in-progress” and the performance against Japan allowed him to echo this sentiment.

Brazil was set on the way to the 3-0 win with an early goal from the player that will be the face of Brazil ’14 during the lead up to next summer’s tournament.

Twenty-one year old Neymar completed a move to Barcelona of Spain just a couple of weeks ago for a fee of around $75M. His goal was beautifully struck and it also marked the high-point of his performance.

His contribution to the win was enough to earn him the “man-of-the-match” award which served to reinforce the heavy weight of expectation that is being thrust on some very young shoulders.

Just go back through previous World Cup winners and try to find someone so young who has led his country to a World Cup win.

Pelé in 1958 you say – not a fair comparison. The world was a far more insular place in 1958 and although Pelé had already set scoring records in Brazil as a 17-year-old he arrived at the World Cup Finals in Sweden as an unknown to most of the soccer world. In addition, he arrived injured and did not play until the third group game against Russia. An incredible achievement but one marked by support from an excellent team that would have in all likelihood won the tournament without Pelé.

Four years later in Chile (he was then ages with Neymar) the tournament was robbed of Pelé’s presence when he was injured in the second game. Garrincha became the dominant player of the tournament and Amarildo’s goals also proved vital.

The 1966 tournament was an abject failure for Brazil as they failed to qualify from group play. Pelé was approaching what should have been his best years as a player but he was unceremoniously kicked by Bulgaria and Portugal to the point where he said he would never appear at another World Cup again.

However he did and Brazil won again in 1970 but by that time he was approaching 30.

Maradona was left off of Argentina’s World Cup winning squad of 1978 when he was 17. At the 1982 World Cup Finals Maradona was expected to leave his mark on the tournament. Instead he left his mark on the groin of Brazil defender Batista. Maradona was sent off and Argentina went home.   Maradona’s accent to the level of a soccer-god had to wait until he was 25 and Mexico 1986.

Lionel Messi’s debut at the World Cup Finals came in 2006 in Germany when he was 18. He was only used sporadically by Argentine coach José Peckerman and never saw the pitch when Argentina lost in the quarter-finals against Germany on penalty kicks.

Four years later in South Africa 22-year-old Messi carried the substantial hopes of Argentina. This time he started all five matches but again Argentina’s hopes were dashed by Germany at the quarter-final stage.  

There can be little doubt that if Brazil is to mount a real challenge in 2014 Neymar will have to play well and contribute goals. But his success or failure is going to have a lot more to do with the supporting cast than his emergence as the savior of Brazilian soccer.

Neymar's Injury And Brazil's Brutality Against Colombia At World Cup - An Alternate View

Back in 1997, David Elleray a former top referee in England was asked to review the 1970 FA Cup Final between Chelsea and Leeds United. That final now enjoys iconic status while at the same time being infamous for violence and brutality.
In the view of Elleray six red cards and twenty yellow cards would have been handed out if the game had been officiated at a “modern” day level.
Now I am no David Elleray and only 24 hours had past since the Brazil and Colombia quarter –final match at the World Cup. But I could not resist watching the game one more time. The reason? It seemed to me that the game I had watched on Friday was somehow out of step with the prevailing view of most pundits, bloggers and tweeters.
Over the last two days I have read columns describing a game of “lawlessness,” “brutality,” and a “bloodbath” amongst other inflammatory descriptions.
So yesterday, I watched the game again willing to accept that maybe I was out of step with reality. Let’s start with a timeline of the fouls and a description of each. Fouls by Brazil in bold type; Colombia in italics. Foul count – Brazil then Colombia.

Minute	Foul	Foul Count
1	Cuadrado tug on Marcelo	0-1
3	Sanchez pull back on Fred	0-2
4	Teo push on Fernandinho	0-3
9	Oscar push from behind on Rodriguez	1-3
12	Oscar push on Armero	2-3
13	Teo on Luiz late challenge	2-4
14	Fernandinho block on Rodriguez	3-4
15	Cuadrado push on Fred	3-5
	Guarin trip on Neymar	3-6
	Marcelo nudge on Cuadrado	4-6
19	Ibarbo foot high on Maicon	4-7
24	Hulk created back for Zapata	5-7
	Fernandinho trip on Rodriguez	6-7
25	Luiz late challenge on Ibarbo	7-7
27	Sanchez block on Neymar	7-8
28	Paulinho push on Ibarbo	8-8
	Marcelo holds back Cuadrado	9-8
35	Fernandinho late challenge on Ibarbo	10-8
38	Thiago Silva push on Cuadrado	11-8
	Zapata pulls Paulinho back	11-9
40	Fred push on Sanchez	12-9
42	Ibarbo push on Hulk	12-10
43	Zuniga trip on Neymar	12-11
45	Zuniga high challenge on Hulk knee	12-12
45+	Fernandinho push from behind on Rodriguez	13-12
	Half time
47	Neymar hand ball	14-12
48	Maicon trip on Rodriguez	15-12
49	Maicon trips Rodriguez from behind	16-12
50	Hulk trip on Zuniga	17-12
51	Guarin push on Fernandinho	17-13
	Marcello push on unknown defender	18-13
54	Fred push on Ospina	19-13
	Marcelo trip on Cuadrado	20-13
55	Hulk trip on Zapata	21-13
	Ramos holds Luiz	21-14
58	Fred pulls back Armero	22-14
61	Yepes holding Fred from behind	22-15
	Luiz blocks Cuadrado	23-15
62	Marcelo trip on Cuadrado	24-15
63	Cuadrado  block on Neymar	24-16
64	Thiago Silva (yellow card) blocks  clearance by Ospina	25-16
65	Paulinho trip on Zuniga	26-16
67	Rodriguez (yellow card)  trip on Hulk	26-17
72	Bacca foul on unknown Brazil defender	26-18
73	Hulk trip on Zapata	27-18
74	Paulinho high boot on Guarin	28-18
76	Bacca push on Thiago Silva	28-19
77	Julio Cesar (yellow card) trips Bacca for penalty	29-19
84	Zapata push on Fernandinho	29-20
87	Quintero holds Oscar back	29-21
90	Rodriguez barges Marcelo	29-22
90+	Fred push on Sanchez	30-22
90+	Hernanes blocks Zuniga	31-22
90+	Zapata foul	31-23

A summary of the offenders.

	Fouls
Player	Brz	Col
Marcelo	5
Fernandinho	4
Hulk	4
Fred	4
Zapata		3
Cuadrado		3
Paulinho	3
Sanchez		2
Teo		2
Oscar	2
Rodriguez		2
Ibarbo		2
Bacca		2
Thiago Silva	2
Luiz	2
Maicon	2
Zuniga		2
Guarin		2
Hernanes	1
Quintero		1
Julio Cesar	1
Yepes		1
Neymar	1
Ramos		1
TOTALS	31	23

And here are some of the  narratives that bother me.

Brazil set out to bully Colombia from the start 

The statistics don’t support that conclusion. At half time the foul count was Brazil 13 to Colombia’s 12. It wasn’t until the 28^th minute of the game that Brazil’s fouls exceeded those of Colombia.
There also seems to be some selective recall of the first half of the match. Of the 25 fouls that were called the worst by far was the 45th minute challenge by Colombia’s Zuniga on Hulk. Zuniga caught Hulk just below the knee and the foul was deserving of a yellow card. It was, in my opinion, the only individual foul in the first half that warranted a caution from the referee.
Further to quote match commentator Jon Roder in the 58^th minute “It’s not been a dirty game at all.”

Brazil brutalized Colombia and in particular James Rodriguez

I found Brazil’s approach to Colombia very similar to the methods used by the Netherlands in the group game against Chile. Alexis Sanchez was the focus of Dutch attention that day and of the 25 fouls (Brazil had 6 more on Friday) 9 were on the Chilean attacker.
Remember the outrage that spilled over after that match and how the Dutch were vilified for their treatment of Sanchez?  Yeah, me neither.
James Rodriguez was on the receiving end of six fouls. Three by Fernandinho, one by Oscar and two by Maicon – three trips, two pushes and one block. None could possibly be construed as a threat to his safety. The times of the fouls were 9^th, 14^th, 24^th, 45^th minutes in first half and 48^th and 49^th (Maicon in quick succession) in the second half.
This column in the New York Times even defended Rodriguez in questioning why he was booked for “an innocuous trip.” The fact is the trip may have been innocuous but when Rodriguez tripped Hulk the Brazilian was a step away from a shooting opportunity in front of the Colombia goal twenty two yards out. Rodriguez wasn’t booked for the trip he was booked on account of the context and positioning of the play.

Over the ninety minutes I did not see one individual foul by Brazil that warranted a yellow card with the exception of the two that were rightly given to Thiago Silva and Julio Cesar.

Persistent fouling by Brazil

This one is more difficult to refute with Fernandinho and Marcelo (in particular) the main culprits. The purpose of issuing a yellow card is to stop such consistent infringement and much has been made of the four fouls by Fernandinho in the first half. But in the interests of full disclosure shouldn’t it be mentioned that the same player went through the second half without committing another foul? If the point was to stop Fernandinho fouling it seems that self-regulation achieved the same end.
Some saw the number of Brazil fouls as tactical fouling – a way to disrupt the flow of the opposition’s game with fouls not bad enough to incur the card -wrath of the referee. Brazil has shown over many years (2002) that tactical fouling is part of their armory. But in this game I am not so sure. It seemed to me that given the positions of the fouls it was a case of petty fouling rather than tactical.

Brazil repeat offenders 

No team has committed more fouls at this tournament than Brazil but before the quarter final Colombia had committed more fouls than Brazil. And just for good measure in between Brazil (96 fouls) and Colombia (91 fouls) is Costa Rica. The team that many have described as bringing a refreshing attitude to the World Cup have committed 94 fouls.

Open Season on Spanish Referee Carlos Velasco Carballo

Did someone just cut their hand in a shark tank? It seems that almost everyone and their uncle were lining up to take shots at the referee. The problem is that so many writers go overboard and start to pick on the wrong things.
One article I read took Carballo to task for allowing Colombia to take a quick free kick. Rodrigues was tripped by Fernandinho in the 24^th minute and several Colombians rushed to Rodriguez’s defence. While Brazilian and Colombian players milled around exchanging multilingual insults (I assume) Rodriguez got up and played a quick free kick.
Immediately the throng dispersed because the ball was in play. According to the writer the free kick should have been retaken and the referee should have then calmed the players down before restarting the match. Something – the calming of the players – that happened immediately when Rodriguez took the quick free kick!!
The officiating was on the laissez-faire side but it was not as bad as has been made out.

Neymar injury

A number of writers apparently see the injury to Neymar as some sort of Karma.  Or to put it in plainer language – blame the victim. The rationale goes something like this. Brazil started the brutality so they should not be shocked when it rebounds and seriously injures their star player.
First of all there was no initial brutality and second of all it infers that when a serious injury happens it is the inevitable result of something that could have been stopped.
Serious injuries happen with saddening regularity but the vast majority are isolated incidents and often the result of innocent contact or no contact whatsoever.   It is a convenient narrative but not one that holds together.

Zuniga meant to injure Neyma

Only Zuniga knows what the intent of his clumsy challenge actually was. But that has not stopped the inference from Zuniga’s post game interview that somehow he intended Neymar physical harm.
Take a step back. There are three minutes left in the quarter final of the World Cup. Your team is 2-1 down and pushing for an equalizer. The ball is cleared to just outside the opposition’s penalty area and only their star striker is between you and the ball.
Do you (a) decide to take a whack at him and gain retribution for past wrongs?
Or (b) try to win the ball and get it back into the danger area?
Two additional points and honest answers only please.
When Neymar went down under the challenge who thought that he was playing for time?
Would you have questioned the referee’s decision if he had immediately blown for a foul and not allowed Brazil advantage?

The Spectacle
The petty fouling certainly impacted the game and lessened it as a spectacle. But to describe the game in the inflammatory terms that have been used so freely misrepresents what actually happened.
On Sunday morning Jeff Bradley (@JerseyJBradley) tweeted something that seems very appropriate – “Deadlines and soccer are a tough match. You learn so much more after seeing statistics and re-watching in an emotion-free state of mind.”
It is a pity that those who have the time to think don’t use it more productively instead of simply echoing the initial thoughts of others.