Bump.

Seems every tournament the ball gets criticised, but this year's ball seems to have substance behind the criticism.

I got my first look at the 2010 World Cup ball this morning as I watched the USA play against Australia in the Colonial Bowl and I have to say, it’s weird, it’s unpredictable, it dips faster than I’m used to, and it’s only going to benefit the weaker teams.

FIFA recently launched a scathing rebuttal of Brazil coach Dunga’s criticizm of the ball when their general secretary Jerome Valke said that Brazil was basically making excuses for their failure:

"And is it Brazil that says that because they are afraid that they will not make it and it will be due to the ball."


But it’s not just Brazil who have complained, other technically adept sides like Spain have also said that the ball is going to be a problem. These teams are used to hitting the ball a certain way and generating a certain spin, dip, and knuckle. With the new ball, this is reportedly easier to do. Clint Dempsey said he likes the new ball because you don’t have to hit it very well or even very hard to make it knuckle. Of course, he also said that any overcooked passes made the player look foolish because of their unpredictability.

In today’s game all three keepers looked unsure of how to deal with crosses and it’s not like they are amateurs. Marcus Hanneman was the best keeper in the Premier League in the second half of last season, Tim Howard played every league game for Everton, and Mark Scwarzer is a vastly experienced keeper at 38 years old yet none of them were able to deal with crosses which seemingly dipped and swerved erratically.

I’m thinking this new ball is going to be a huge advantage for teams with less adept players because an unpredictable ball is an advantage. We’ll probably see plenty of long range efforts that seriously test the keepers this Summer and you should bank on several weird upsets owing to the unpredictability of the ball.

It’s going to be a wild ride I suspect.