Interesting article from the NYTimes Magazine exploring why the rest of the world (non-US, that is) takes soccer so seriously (registration req.) Also delves into the impact of soccer on politics -- PM Harold Wilson blaming his reelection defeat on England's loss in the 1970 W.C. ... The desperate hope that an Argentine win this year will revive that country. And this nugget: "The game probably matters even more in Iran, a state gripped in recent years by what has been
called ''a soccer revolution.'' This began in 1997, when the Iranian team beat Australia to qualify
for the '98 World Cup. Thousands of women broke into the stadium to join the celebrations,
some removed their veils and, at street parties across the country, men and women danced and
kissed, defying government warnings and clerical taboos.
Last fall, as Iran again looked as if it would qualify for the World Cup, the street parties resumed. Initially the fans just seemed to be expressing national pride, but in some towns the mood changed. Fans attacked state-owned banks and other public buildings, chanting, "Death to the
Mullahs." There were even chants in support of the exiled monarchy. Hundreds, perhaps thousands, were arrested over several nights.
Eventually Iran had only to beat tiny Bahrain, a team it should have dominated, to qualify for the
World Cup. The tournament would have brought weeks of street parties and demonstrations. So when Iran lost the game 3-1, rumors abounded in Tehran that the mullahs had pressured the players to lose, in what may be a unique case of a regime wanting its national team to fail. No one knows, but Iran's forwards appeared so unwilling to try to score that at one point the Iranian television commentator exclaimed, "Why doesn't someone shoot that ball?"