Italy wobble under FIFA rule

TV View: "It's a weird World Cup, as well as a wobbly one," as Motty Motson put it yesterday, and never, in the course of his long and distinguished commentating career, has he summed up anything more succinctly or accurately. Apart, perhaps, from the time he declared that "Spurs are nearer to being out of the FA Cup now than any other time since the first half of this season, when they weren't even in it anyway."

Weird and wobbly, then, are the only words for it. And those of us who predicted that France and Argentina would fall at the first hurdle aren't being guffawed at quite as much. True, some of us never actually predicted any such thing, but if we had we would and they wouldn't. But we don't mean to gloat.

Some of us also predicted a tight affair in yesterday morning's battle of the coffee beans, Brazil v Costa Rica, with defences on top and few goal-scoring chances being created. By full time, Alan Hansen, somewhat pointedly, suggested that our prediction had gone the way of France and Argentina's World Cup hopes: down the tubes and up the Swanny. "Seven goals, 23 clear-cut chances and 61 half chances - it was like watching Brazil playing Brazil."

Before the game (and the other Group C fixture, Turkey v China), Gary Lineker explained the permutations. Simple enough. If Costa Rica won and Turkey didn't or China won and Brazil did too or Costa Rica scored three goals and Turkey didn't or if China kind of did and Brazil kind of didn't and Costa Rica's goal difference was better than Turkey's then anything was possible in the group.

Armed with that knowledge we settled down for the game. Brazil, tentative and conservative, only threw 10 men in to attack, opting to leave Marcos in goal. God be with the days they possessed a spirit of adventure. Costa Rica, opting for a similarly negative approach, kept two men in their own half for much of the game. What followed was . . . sigh . . . footballing heaven on earth.

Ronaldo scored with a "soft-shoe-shuffle-shot", according to Barry Davies, and defender - yep, "defender" - Edmilson scored one of those goals that you usually see only in Nike ads, computer-trickery-aided.

By full time we'd had to settle for just the seven goals, the last of which was greeted thus by Davies: "This is the highest-scoring match in the World Cup so far. Wait a minute. No it isn't. What am I talking about? What about the Germans?" Don't worry about it Bar, we lost count ourselves.

"It's not a morning to talk about defending," concluded Lineker. Hansen agreed, largely because "there wasn't any in the game". Safe journey home Costa Rica, thanks for the memories, it was lovely knowing you.

Italy v Mexico. Gary Lineker explained the permutations. Simple enough. If Italy won and Croatia didn't or Ecuador won and Mexico did too or Croatia scored three goals and Italy didn't or if Mexico kind of did and Ecuador kind of didn't . . .

Armed with that knowledge we settled down for the game. Italy had a damn fine goal disallowed. If the Boys in Blue are beginning to develop a persecution complex, can you blame them? The FIFA directive is now clear: for every good goal Italy want "allowed" they must score three. It's harsh, but dems de rules.

When Borgetti put Mexico one up, with a gem of a goal, the bookies of the world declared as one: "Can life get any better?" To which the bookies of the world replied: "Nope." As Lineker put it, "au revoir France, adios Argentina - is it to be arrivederci Italy?"

Over on RTÉ Billo Herlihy noted that "Italy had more misses than Henry VIII", while Brian Kerr observed that "Mexico are playing so deep there's times I think the lad Marquez is having a smoke beside the goalkeeper". Divils, the pair of them.

Italy out? Not quite. Ecuador scored. And then Alessandro del Piero "lost Marquez at the back post" to equalise, as Kerro described the goal. It was a Hamlet moment for Marquez, and suddenly there was a danger that the dreams (pipedreams, perhaps) of Mexico's players would, em, go up in smoke.

Five minutes left, Italy surged forward in search of a winner they didn't need, Mexico chucked caution to the prevailing wind and sought their own winner, which they didn't need either.

Well, no. That's not what happened. There followed a five-minute session of "after you" football, leaving this couch suspecting that Mexico and Italy were content with the draw. No flies on us.

A fair enough result, all concluded, with Kerro moved to pay tribute to Italy's sophisticated style of play: "Lump it and take your chances stuff," he said, "they looked all over the place."

Weird and wobbly, then. It's hard for this couch to make any sense of it any more. A Paraguay v South Korea final? Probably. Although, as Football 365 quoted New Zealand coach Grant Waite as saying yesterday, "Ireland could surprise a few teams as long as they can keep key players like Martin Keown fit." Indeed. Although Senegal's left winger, Pape Damo Duff might yet have the final say. Weird and wobbly.