A columnist in Mural wrote about Alexi Lalas' statements regarding his feelings toward El Tri. The column San Cadilla featured a message to Alexi and the columnist said that even though the former US central defender would likely not read his words, he wanted to send his message anyway.
He broke it down this way:
1. The hate (in sporting terms) goes both ways.
2. Lalas is just bitter because in his day the "gringos" couldn't hang with the Mexicans.
3. Anyone whose real name is Panayotis Alexander can't be taken seriously as a player, a musician and much less as a TV analyst.
Showing posts with label Lalas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lalas. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Monday, January 19, 2009
Lalas getting play
Alexi Lalas has been getting a lot of notoriety in Mexico lately. Apparently, his comments on ESPN a week ago about how he hates Mexico and wants to crush them were not taken too kindly down south.
Here's a clip from Futbol Picante that has what Lalas said and then some back-and-forth between the panel (which I took the liberty of loosely translating):
The first guy talks about how Alexi Lalas went to Italy but that it did not go well for him at all, and how the US has had better exports than him. Then, he says that a US win over Mexico is to the US like a Mexico win over Brazil is to Mexico and that he doesn't have the slightest doubt over that. He goes on to say that, because of the United States' inability to beat Mexico in Mexico, everything is even between the two nations.
He then talks positively about the Americans and their performance in the 02 World Cup, how they tap-danced over Portugal and had a 3-0 lead over 30 minutes, how they had a goal robbed from them against Germany.
Then, the younger guy chimes in and seems incredulous about the statement that beating Mexico is akin to El Tri beating Brazil. He says that the US made them (Mexican media/fans I assume) believers a long time ago.
The host says to look at who the US has played - they've played against England, Italy, Argentina, Holland. They know that if they don't play those teams they won't grow.
The gray-haired guy says that the US does have some talent, that Donovan is a great player but that is a team that succeeds because of their tactics and not because of their talent, that the best thing they do is defend.
The host says that what has worked for the US has been their consistency, that Steve Sampson was an assistant under Bora, that Bruce Arena worked with the Under-20s (did he? I'm not sure he's right on that one), that Bob Bradley was an assitant coach as well, and then compares that to Mexico who went from Ricardo Lavolpe to Hugo Sanchez, which was a completely different coach, and now Sven Goran Eriksson, whom he says he still does not understand and says the US has an advantage over them there as well.
Here's a clip from Futbol Picante that has what Lalas said and then some back-and-forth between the panel (which I took the liberty of loosely translating):
The first guy talks about how Alexi Lalas went to Italy but that it did not go well for him at all, and how the US has had better exports than him. Then, he says that a US win over Mexico is to the US like a Mexico win over Brazil is to Mexico and that he doesn't have the slightest doubt over that. He goes on to say that, because of the United States' inability to beat Mexico in Mexico, everything is even between the two nations.
He then talks positively about the Americans and their performance in the 02 World Cup, how they tap-danced over Portugal and had a 3-0 lead over 30 minutes, how they had a goal robbed from them against Germany.
Then, the younger guy chimes in and seems incredulous about the statement that beating Mexico is akin to El Tri beating Brazil. He says that the US made them (Mexican media/fans I assume) believers a long time ago.
The host says to look at who the US has played - they've played against England, Italy, Argentina, Holland. They know that if they don't play those teams they won't grow.
The gray-haired guy says that the US does have some talent, that Donovan is a great player but that is a team that succeeds because of their tactics and not because of their talent, that the best thing they do is defend.
The host says that what has worked for the US has been their consistency, that Steve Sampson was an assistant under Bora, that Bruce Arena worked with the Under-20s (did he? I'm not sure he's right on that one), that Bob Bradley was an assitant coach as well, and then compares that to Mexico who went from Ricardo Lavolpe to Hugo Sanchez, which was a completely different coach, and now Sven Goran Eriksson, whom he says he still does not understand and says the US has an advantage over them there as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
