Perhaps the more interesting result came in the second game: North Korea defeated Brazil 1-0, a result you might think is quite an upset. But, really, it’s not. North Korea reached the final of the previous U-20Women’s World Cup, losing 2-1 to the United States in the final, and won the previous edition of the competition in 2006, as well as the 2008 FIFA U-17 Women’s  World Cup.

It’s worth taking a brief look at the history of this tournament since it began in 2002 to get a sense of what we can expect in Germany this month.

The tournament has been a bright spot in women’s soccer, since the first final in Edmonton, Canada drew a crowd of 47,784 at Commonwealth Stadium to see the home team go down 1-0 to the United States in September 2002. That crowd was no aberration: much like the 1999 Women’s World Cup that saw the US draw 90,185 fans to the Rose Bowl for the final, the home crowd got behind their team, 37,194 watching the semi-final as Canada defeated Brazil on penalty kicks, Chrstine Sinclair playing a starring role and a young Marta on view in Commonwealth Stadium.

The decision to stage games at Commonwealth Stadium, a vast venue in Edmonton built for the 1978 Commonwealth Games, was controversial: FIFA officials, visiting in 2001, had warned games would be played to an empty venue. But though some games were poorly attended, Commonwealth Stadium averaged a healthy 19,841 per game. Considerably smaller crowds attended smaller venues in Vancouver and Victoria, but an overall average of 11,351 per game for the duration of the competition far surpassed FIFA’s expectations.

That, again, was an echo of 1999: FIFA had wanted the Women’s World Cup games to be played at small venues on the east coast of the United States, but the American organising committee, gutsily led by Marla Messing, went for huge stadia and the decision paid-off: it felt like a big event, and became a big event.

Similarly, that 2002 U-19 Women’s World Cup in Canada, featuring 12 teams, received extensive local media coverage  according to FIFA’s technical report. The final was watched by almost 1 million viewers on Canada’s Sportsnet station. Not unimportantly, the tournament also provided vital experience for young referees: 12 female referees and 12 assistants from 20 countries officiated the 26 games, most of them making their debuts in official FIFA competition. Only two red cards were issued in the entire tournament.

The next U-19 Women’s World Cup was held in Thailand in November 2004, won by Germany, adding that title to their Women’s World Cup win the previous year in the United States, and pre-cursing their second senior world title in 2007. As in 2002, attendance was very strong for the host nation’s games, with 40,000 attending Thailand’s opener: though unfortunately, they faced Germany, and were thumped 6-0. Thailand was clearly not ready for this level of competition, losing their next game 7-0 to Canada, and their tournament ending with a 5-0 defeat to Australia. This is surely the worst performance by a host nation in the history of FIFA competition. Still, the crowds for the latter stages were decent, with 23,000 attending the final, Germany beating China 2-0. Brazil were eliminated at the semi-final stage, but Marta still took home the Golden Ball for best player. An overall average attendance of 11,089 was a positive.

The 2006 U-20 Women’s World Cup saw it move to a third different continent, hosted by Russia, and it would feature a surprising winner, with North Korea taking their first FIFA trophy: though perhaps that shouldn’t be considered a surprise, as the North Koreans had been dominating Asian competition in recent years. Indeed, the rapid development of women’s soccer in Asia as a whole, seen in the history of the U-20 tournament, is a remarkable story.

The age limit for the World Cup had been raised by one year to make it a U-20 event, with FIFA also instituting a U-17 FIFA Women’s World Cup, beginning play in 2008. The tournament was also expanded to 16 teams. Interestingly, the average age of players was almost exactly the same as in 2004 (18 years and 11 months), despite the new age limit. The tournament was a bit of a disappointment; European teams were weakened by it nearly coinciding with the UEFA U-19 competition, and attendance was extremely poor, barely reaching four figures for most games.

The hosts, Russia, went out at the quarter-final stage to China. The final between China and North Korea, the first between two Asian teams in global FIFA competition, was unfortunately a mudbath, played in pelting rain. According to the official report, the players were “enveloped in mud”, but “the Koreans, however, were not deterred by the conditions in the slightest and they attacked relentlessly with great determination.” The Koreans crushed the Chinese 5-0 in front of 8,500 soaked spectators. Curiously, no North Korean was named in FIFA’s top three players of the tournament, China’s Xiaoxu Ma taking the Golden Ball. Overall, with an average crowd of just 1,644 per game and a total of 52,630 spectators for the entire tournament, the U-20 Women’s World Cup had taken something of a step back.

Chile, 2008 U-20 Women’s World Cup host, presented a much greater success: the tournament saw more goals than ever (3.5 goals per game), and a decent enough average of 6,749 fans per game. More importantly, the host nation used the tournament as a springboard for women’s soccer in Chile, now in strong shape (one of its clubs, Everton, came fourth in the first Women’s Copa Libertadores staged in 2009). The Chilean government, then led by Michelle Bachelet, affirmed its support of the competition by rebuilding four stadia for the event and by supporting a new league championship for women. Unfortunately, results did not go well for Chile, losing all three games and exiting at the group stage, but the seeds were sown for future growth: surely the point of the competition existing. The United States won the U-20 Women’s World Cup for the first time since 2002, defeating the defending champions North Korea in the final 2-1 in front of 12,000 fans.

That brings us to 2010, and the tournament in Germany, which has a particular importance with the senior Women’s World Cup to be held there in 2011. Strong crowds and interest in this U-20 competition could presage what should be the most successful Women’s World Cup in terms of global media attention and attendance since USA ’99, given the strength of women’s soccer in Germany and the lack of any major competing global competitions next summer.

Hungary vs. Russia, 3 March 2010.

Photo credit: photoreti on Flickr, via the Pitch Invasion Photo Pool.

Allianz Arena, Munich, Germany. November 2005.

The J-League's Consadole Sapporo's mascot, at the 59th Sapporo Snow Festival. Feburary 10, 2008.

Fans of FC Luch-Energiya outside Dinamo Stadium, Vladivostok, Russia.

Stal Stalowa Wola vs. Motor Lublin, Poland. October 17, 2009.

Photo credits: thor.sten (Germany), Sasakei (Japan), Lisster (Vladivostok, Russia), mi… (Poland), via the Pitch Invasion Photo Pool.

Big Story
England and the United States might be the favourites to host the 2018 and 2022 World Cups, but both countries have hosted  a  World Cup before: a fact Russia are counting on as crucial in their own bids. “Every tournament should be held in a country that has not previously hosted it,” said sports minister Vitaly Mutko. “Our bid is unique … and (winning) will enable our cities to take on a completely different appearance.”

I particularly like the fact that they are touting their ability to host the World Cup because they “hosted a lavish Eurovision Song Contest” this year. “Tell me, who conducts such events better than Russia?” Mutko said. Let’s hope the World Cup in 2022 has a pre-game show like this winning song from the contest in Moscow:

In all seriousness, though, Russia looks likely to put together a very competitive bid. Its biggest challenge is infrastructure, with the construction of five new stadiums and considerable refurbishment of ten others necessary, an issue not facing England or the U.S.  Beyond that, the 14 host cities scattered across the vast country require a massive investment in transport links, including the building of new international airports. It would be a much riskier prospect for FIFA than even South Africa was, without the prestige of taking the World Cup to a new continent.

Worldwide News

• For perhaps the first time (Italian football fans, please inform me), supporters of an Italian club are trying to buy their team — AS Roma fans are putting together a supporters’ trust to try to purchase the club. Best of luck to them.
• Apropos of apparently nothing, Tony Cascarino brings up the old chestnut of Rangers and Celtic joining the English Premier League, and suggests they should simply be parachuted in there without having to work their way up through the league. Which of course, would make a complete mockery of the entire pyramid structure essential to English football.
• Gambling on football in England continues to be a problem, and the Football Assocation’s chairman Lord Triesman has sensibly called for a complete ban on betting on the game by any player, manager or official — currently, there is only a ban on betting on a game one is involved in.
• I hope many of you have been following Pitch Invasion contributor Richard Whittall’s series on what MLS means to fans. It’s been a random patchwork of commentary, but well worth reading, perhaps for that reason: the direction of the league and its clubs remains a serious work-in-progress, but there is a reason why we bother. Richard will be sweeping up for you over the weekend — see you on Monday.

The Sweeper appears daily. For more rambling and links throughout the day every day, follow your editor Tom Dunmore @pitchinvasion on Twitter.

Whenever that Brilliant Orange bursts forth with attacking gusto, the deeds of Rinus Michels, Stefan Kovacs, and Johan Cruijff are suddenly resurrected, with the Dutch believed to have recaptured their heritage from the 1970s.

That, of course, is guff: the Dutch have played some fine, fine football at this tournament, but on a systematic and even aesthetic level, it bears little resemblance to the complex genius of Total Football (“whatever that was”, as ESPN’s Adrian Healey recently pronounced bemusedly).

Here is but the merest glimpse of what Total Football actually was for the Dutch at the 1974 World Cup. Note the overlapping runs, the intense pressure, the high line the defense held, the penetrating runs, the patience to open space, and suddenly, the viper attack.

As Jonathan Wilson presciently pointed out in the Guardian, it is not the Dutch, but rather their opponents tomorrow who most resemble a resurrection of Total Football, albeit one that has to adapt to the hyper-physical world of football today.

Russian commentators, referring back to the great ice-hockey teams of the past, spoke of “clap-clap” football, mimicking the way the puck used to click from stick to stick. Others, noting the fact that both goals were laid on by full-backs on the charge, have given Hiddink credit for reawakening a form of total football in Russia, yet that style has always been implicit in the Lobanovskyi school.

Wilson is referring to Valeri Lobanovskyi, coach of Dynamo Kiev in the 1970s, the first to win a major European club title with a Soviet team, noted for his scientific methods of management. Yet Wilson believes that the Russian team is as much following on Lobanovskyi’s footsteps as in that of Ajax’s, that the Russians have their own history of Total Football to draw on.

One of the great fallacies of football history is the notion that the Ajax and Holland of the early Seventies was all about self-expression, while Lobanovskyi’s Dynamo Kyiv was some kind of mechanistic monster. Yes, Lobanovskyi imposed his style of play upon his squad, while Rinus Michels watched his grow up almost organically among an extraordinary group of talented players who had played together for so long that they came to have an almost preternatural understanding of one another’s games, but the central tenets of both were the same. Dynamo and Ajax both played a high offside line, both pressed the opposition in possession, both thrived on rapid passing and the interchange of positions. Most fundamentally, both were about the performance of the individual within the system.

This leads us to the tantalising and fascinating possibility that Russian football today has somehow merged the brilliance of both the Dutch and Soviet variants of Total Football, though of course, the modern game’s compressed nature hardly allows for the kind of self-expression available for a Cruyff (which makes the Russians one-touch brilliance the other night even more admirable, in fact). Those who played close attention to Zenit St. Petersburg’s rapier counter-attacking — under, of course, the Dutchman Dick Advocaat — in their glorious UEFA Cup title run will have seen a presage of Russia’s performance in Euro 2008 the other night, with Arshavin pulling the strings.

Perhaps, by the team you read this, Russia vs. Netherlands will have petered out into a bore draw, stage fright getting the best of the contenders for the Total Football crown, and making such terminology seem laughable. But it is certainly worth remembering, when we hear that phrase bandied around liberally, what Total Football actually was, and its existence outside the confines of the Oranje.

Coached by Dick Advocaat, Zenit clinched their first ever Russian championship last week, to match their tally in the Soviet days.

Photo credit: reduda on Flickr.

The “Lokomotiv” name refers to their role as part of the rail transport workers’ sports society, once home to over a million athletes in different sports throughout the Soviet Union. Lokomotiv are considered a smaller team than their city rivals Spartak and CSKA Moscow, but they did win the Premier League in 2002. The new stadium, replacing a 9,000 capacity ground that did not meet UEFA’s requirements, stands them in good stead as their facilities now surpass most other Eastern European teams.

Photo credit: luisvieira on Flickr, via the Pitch Invasion photo pool.

The photo reads, in English, Spartak — for Спартак Москва, of course. As Jonathon Wilson’s Behind the Curtain explains, “Spartak have had a hooligan element since the seventies, when shaven-headed thugs in their red-and-white colours would rampage through city centres and daub their slogans on walls — further evidence, to those looking for it, of the club’s renowned independence.”

Read on for more about Spartak’s history.

Spartak’s origins lie in catering, and supporters have appropriated opposition taunts of ‘Meat, Meat’ to respond with “Who are we? We’re The Meat!”. And indeed, they have long been the meat of Russian football.

Spartak were the most successful Russian club during the Soviet era, winning twelve championships (Dynamo Kiev, from Ukraine, won one more). They were known as the most independent club from the regime (other clubs received funding from the Red Army and the KGB, but Spartak were only loosely funded by trade unions), and that’s one reason why they’ve never had their own stadium.

Their current home, Luzhniki Stadium (formerly Lenin Stadium), hosted the 1980 Olympic Games opening and closing ceremonies but was also home to Russia’s worst football disaster in 1982, when perhaps 340 people died in an icy stampede.

Thankfully, the stadium has since been renovated. Without Dynamo Kiev to compete with, Spartak initially dominated the Russian championship, winning nine of the first fourteen years. The last few years have been less successful, as they haven’t won the title since 2001; this year, they finished second for the third successive year, losing out to FC Zenit on the last day.

Photo credit: bcjens on Flickr, via the Pitch Invasion photo pool. Much of the information in this post came from Jonathon Wilson’s excellent book, Behind the Curtain.

CSKA stands for “Central Sports Club [Klub] of the Army”, so you can guess who they had on their side in Soviet days. Not surprisingly, then, they were very successful, winning seven Soviet championships. In the Russian championship since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the club have continued their success, winning a further three championships in the past five seasons, after a long lean spell in the 1990s. That success owes much to a name familiar to us: Roman Abramovich’s Sibneft oil company invested $54 million in the club in a 2004 sponsorship deal, helping them to their 2005 UEFA Cup Final victory over Sporting Lisbon.

The final was, coincidentally, held in the latter’s stadium, so it’s pretty likely that is when the below photo was taken, as CSKA fans marked the first time a Russian team had won a major European tournament. Sibneft ended their sponsorship of the team shortly after, as Abramovich sold most of his stake in the company and it invested in FC Zenit instead.

Photo credit: dotspiral on Flickr, via the Pitch Invasion photo pool.

It’s the home of FC Luch-Energia Vladivostok (Футбольный клуб “Луч-Энергия” Владивосток), who finished fourteenth out of sixteen teams in the Russian Premier League this season. Fortunately for them, it’s only the bottom two teams that get relegated.

Photo credit: Lisster on Flickr, via the Pitch Invasion photo pool.