Straight from the couch

Today on ESPN's Around the Horn, the first topic was "Zidane to blame for loss?" I'll rundown this topic, and the rest of the topics on the show for anyone who doesn't watch because they can't stand Jay Mariotti (I'm with you). You can't pin the loss on Zidane. Henry and Ribery were already out of the game. Henry is incredible with the ball and losing him was a big blow. France didn't have a lot of people who could create goals, and he, along with Zidane, were obviously the two best. Then, once Zidane was red carded and France was a man down, it would have been a major upset for them to score and win before PK's. However, France's only goal was on a PK by Zidane very early in the game anyway. The only two goals Italy allowed in the entire tournament were an own goal vs. USA and the PK by Zidane (on an awful foul call, but one that was made up for by a no call on an actual foul in the box in the 2nd half ... apparently, two wrongs do make a right). So, what I'm getting at is that even with Zidane for the duration of OT, playing 11 vs. 11, the chances of France getting another goal were slim ... especially with Henry already being subbed out.

Second, although Jay Mariotti seems to think not having Zidane for PK's was an enormous blow to the French side, I disagree. Sure, Zidane probably would have taken the 1st kick for the French side. You can even assume that he nails it. However, don't you think the guy France sent up 2nd would have gone 3rd? Fabien Barthez didn't come close to stopping any of the Italy attempts. The Italy keeper didn't prevent any French kicks from going in either ... he just got lucky that one hit the cross bar and bounced out. If Zidane would have been allowed to kick all the PK's for France, or if Italy had missed one and the last French person missed, you could peg Zidane for a lot of the blame. But, given the rules, Zidane and four (at least) other French players needed to make kicks, and that probably wouldn't have happened.

One last thing, rumors are that the Italian defender who received the head butt both gave Zidane a titty-twister and called him a terrorist. The titty-twister story comes from Woody Paige, so I'm not sure if it's true, although the defender did have ahold of Zidane on the play and had ample opportunity. Remember when Chris Kaman had his private parts attacked by Reggie Evans? Kaman didn't just let it go, and I doubt Evans yelled something racist at Kaman. Kaman shoved Evans and probably would have been red carded in a soccer match. I don't know if Zidane was called a terrorist or if he wasn't, but FIFA, given all their posturing about anti-racism before the World Cup, should definitely be investigating this matter. If I recall correctly, racism by players was supposed to result in forfeiting the match, which would mean that France would be World Cup Champions. I hope this issue isn't swept under the rug ... I just find it hard to believe that a seasoned vet like Zidane would lose his cool without a fair amount of provocation.

Topic number two is baseball at the MLB break ... and Michael Smith is calling the Yankees the most impressive team so far. Unfortunately, he failed to recognize Mike Mussina and Randy Johnson as the 1-2 punch at the top of the NYY rotation, instead given us Wang as the number 2 guy. Woody Paige just called Justin Verlander "Veelander." I'm not sure what the point of this topic is. It's easy to pick the Tigers and not look at other teams. What about the Mets? Who thought Tom Glavine would pitch at an elite level or that Wright, Beltran and Reyes would be this good? The San Diego Padres are leading the West. I don't like the selection of the Yankees because they are loaded, even with the injuries they've had. Sure, they lost Hideki Matsui and Gary Sheffield, but they still run Damon, Jeter, Rodriguez, Giambi, Posada out there every day. Randy Johnson hasn't thrown real well, but he's been out there. Mussina has been healthy. They've had some unfortunate injuries, but they're only two games up on the Blue Jays, who have been without A.J. Burnett most of the year.

The third topic is LeBron and whether or not he'll win a title in Cleveland. Mariotti's argument was that no Cleveland team has won anything lately. Nice, Jay. LBJ is the most talented player in the NBA and may already be the league's best player. The two teams that were ahead of them in the Eastern Conference, when it was all said and done, were the Pistons and Heat. The Pistons lost a key cog in Ben Wallace. The Pistons have good offensive talent, they don't need another go-to offensive player, so the loss of Wallace's energy at the defensive end and on the boards will result in the Cavs jumping over them. The Heat might have a vastly different roster next season and Shaq is getting old. Dwayne Wade is a very good player, but I'd take King James given the choice between the two. The Nets and Bulls will be in the mix, the Bucks are an improving team, and the Raptors seem like they are turning things around, but it's hard to argue against LeBron and the Cavs having a shot at getting to, and winning, the NBA Finals in the near future.

Moving on, we wind up talking about golf and who the better pick is to win the British Open, Tiger or Phil. Paige picked neither, which doesn't even make sense given the question. It's the British Open, I'll side with Adande and Jay (reluctantly) and take Tiger as the better pick to win it.

Federer and Nadal is the next topic and whether or not it is a legit rivalry. If I have my numbers right, Nadal is 5-0 against Federer on clay, they are 1-1 on hard court, and Federer won yesterday on grass, in their first meeting on that surface. Nadal is vastly improving on grass and isn't just a one surface pony. I don't like his capris or calling for a towel every other point, but it's definitely a rivalry at this point because both of them are competitive on pretty much every surface, although neither has broken through on the other's best surface. They met in the finals of the last two majors, with each of them winning. If that isn't a rivalry, then I don't know what is. OU v. Texas football was still a rivalry even though OU won 5 in a row.

Should Danica Patrick jump to NASCAR? I'm with Michael Smith ... definitely! I don't know if Patrick is, or isn't, a good driver. I don't know what the difference is between driving Indy and Stock cars, but she should at least take a shot if it's a better job. She hasn't won any IRL races, she might as well give the more popular circuit a shot.

I'm skipping the Showdown topics because they were lacking ... Who was the 19-inning game the toughest on? Like today's episode, my post is going out with a wimper, not a bang. Oh well, maybe tomorrow will bring us at least one of the Dallas writers and no Mariotti.