What Consolation?
Sunday is the day when football supporters around the world will watch Italy and France battle it out to see who gets the right to proclaim themselves World Cup victor for the next four years. Which means that Saturday will be the conciliatory match between the two best performing losers of this year’s tournament. I have come to despise the very existence of the consolation game. It is pointless, it is demeaning, and it carries with it no benefit other than as a way to pack a little more advertising in to the run up to the championship.
The very name “consolation match” is a sort of olive branch to the teams who, while performing admirably, weren’t quite of the caliber to make it to the championship. That’s fine. While it is no doubt disappointing, there is no shame in being eliminated in the semi-finals. But the consolation game implies that Portugal and Germany need a shoulder to cry on, someone to pat them on the back and say “It’s okay, you’ll get ‘em next time.”
Both of these teams had tremendous performances this year, as I’m sure the players and their native fans know, and I have little doubt that the citizens of their respective nations are proud of their achievement and the professional manner in which the teams conducted themselves. But the fact is that, no matter how well they played, they are now in the same boat as the other twenty-eight teams who were eliminated prior. Does anyone outside of the countries represented know who finished third or fourth in 94 or 98? More importantly, does anyone care?
So while I appreciate FIFA’s attempt to fill the three-day void between the semi-finals and the championship, I cannot bear to watch two great teams do battle in what will no doubt be a great match, knowing that they are being used simply as a sideshow, an opening act for the main event on Sunday. They are better than that.
The World Cup is not a children’s spelling bee where everyone gets a ribbon for a job well done. It’s not a tournament to see who is better than whom. It’s a tournament to see, simply, who is the best. And while it may not seem fair and justified, especially when your team is no longer in the running, when all is said and done, everyone falls into one of two groups: the champions and everyone else.
 |
Soccer Forums | International Results |  |
 |  Travel |
Related Posts
Subscribe
|
Print
|
Share        |
Comments
Displaying the most recent 25 comments from a total of 35 comments.
Read the rest of the comments
By pao | July 7th, 2006 at 4:28 am 
the consolation match is often very enjoyable because they teams are lighthearted. And still it is important. I can recall every winner of the conoslation matches i witnessed, in 1978 Brazil over Italy, in 1982 Poland over France, in 1986 France over Belgium, in 1990 Italy over England, oooops I can’t remember in 1994 i was focusing on the final, anyway it was a Sweden-Bulgaria deal, in 1998 hey i am tired i am not typing anymore. Goodnight.
Posted from 
Italy
By sumyung gei | July 7th, 2006 at 4:48 am yes I forgot to mention also, what pao just said, it is definitly more of a “friendly” match not just with the players and there opponenets on the field, but also among opposing fans, it is indeed a lighthearted match, where since it is not a battle for the final championship, naturaly the teams tend to have respect for each other more than “all or nothing” matches.
Posted from 
Canada
By tony | July 7th, 2006 at 5:49 am heres a thought, instead of a 3rd place game, if fifa really wants some extra ad money or hype, whatever, how about the game that never was but we all wish did? it could be decided by a worldwide vote or an official panel, it would be an exciting concept, the most hated team vs a team eliminated controversially, or the worst performing team vs the best that didnt go through etc, etc, all but the finalists would be eligible,??? just a thought. posted from canada, (cant seem to get the flag)..
By Karl | July 7th, 2006 at 6:17 am I understand where you’re coming from but….
How about S. Korea/Turkey in the 2002? Tell me the fans didn’t care about that! Perhaps the third place match does work best when the host nation is involved! The Germans might even agree with you that the third place match holds little consolation but I bet that will end right after kick-off and nobody will be thinking about defeat until the final whistle blows. It is a good opportunity to see two great teams play again, plus they tend to play more attractive soccer now that the pressure is off. Besides, what is the alternative? Having no matches till match until the final? I’ll take the third place game.
Posted from 
United States
By Gus | July 7th, 2006 at 7:26 am How about deciding the Golden Boot winner? From what I can remember, Toto Schillacci (1990) and Davor Suker (1998) both got their last (and deciding) goal of the tournament in a Third Place Match, and went through to win the golden boot. I don’t know how many times that has happened (The 3rd place match deciding the golden boot), but I’m pretty sure those players felt more consoled by being the top goalscorer than by their country getting 3rd place 
Posted from 
Australia
By SumYung Gie | July 7th, 2006 at 8:06 am that’s true, if lets say Miroslav Klose scores two goals in this match he migt very well win the golden boot award, Go Klose!
Posted from Canada
By futbol | July 7th, 2006 at 8:09 am Well, I would love to see ARG – GER re-match.
It’s going to be an awesome game…
Posted from United States
By Freddy | July 7th, 2006 at 8:42 am C’mon stop complaining! One more game to watch – what are we dissenting about – more games to watch means more excitement and more action – pow wow!! I would say there will be more skills showcased in such matches!! Ironic but true.
To make the match interesting, FIFA should issue special trophies to 2nd and 3rd place winners to make the games more exciting. No trophy, no romping!
Posted from 
Malaysia
By Freddy | July 7th, 2006 at 8:46 am I like Toni’s idea. Something like the American idol stuff – vote your favorite 2 teams (who are not playing in the finals) to compete in and have a special cup offered!! I think the world is going “interactive”. Imagine US$0.50 per vote – how much would FIFA made out from such a gimmick!!!
Perhaps, they will also afford titanium and platinum soccer balls afterwards.
Posted from Malaysia
By Vico | July 7th, 2006 at 9:44 am In spite of agreeing 100% with Toni’s reasoning in why there shouldn’t be the consolation game…I like that as of today there are still two games left in the tournament and not just one. So I’ll be watching! It’s going to be sad when there is none for another 4 years…
Posted from United States
By James | July 7th, 2006 at 10:10 am I love the 3rd/4th place games, anyone remember Seden v Bulgaria in 94!!
Posted from 
United Kingdom
By sourav | July 7th, 2006 at 10:23 am Sorry Tom, don’t agree. Its better being third than fourth and chances are this will be a better game than the finals since both teams will be out to prove a point about their abilities and the consequence of losing does not hang like an albatross around the neck.
Should be a good one
Posted from 
India
By Lalrinchhana 'R.Cho' Tochhawng | July 7th, 2006 at 10:31 am Yes the name itself is so consolidatory, but what the heck, it’s always one cracker of a game. As Pao has mentioned I remmber all the past 3rd and 4th placed teams from the time I could remember such a phenomena happened once every four years, i am 29, and had since followed the world cup from Espania 1982.
Posted from India
By *PaTtI* | July 7th, 2006 at 10:41 am umm..well there’s only one thing i can say now…GERMANYYY GOO..get 3rd place…better than nothing at least they made it this far..duhh!
Posted from Australia
By Pruritus | July 7th, 2006 at 10:43 am Pahh!
I like the Consolation-Games.
Its just fun, its just football, its just sport. Do you really think thats pointless?
Im glad to see Olli Kahn the Titan playing in the goal for a last game.
Posted from 
Germany
By mara1ona | July 7th, 2006 at 11:18 am How many coutries start off in the World Cup tournament? Hunderds if not thousands
Of course there should be a 3rd place.
By squiggle | July 7th, 2006 at 12:18 pm I disagree. Who wouldn’t rather finish 3rd than 4th? Silly to call it a consolation match, though.
By Samuel Knight | July 7th, 2006 at 5:41 pm Consolation Match is an astounding stupid name. Bronze Medal match would be more like it.
3rd best team in the world – that should be huge. And yes, as a fan I always liked it when my team made the semis because that meant you got to watch your guys two more times guaranteed!
And yes it is played as a friendly – and given how many stupid friendlies you have – is that a criticism?
But FIFA does an awful job in framing what should be the match between 2 of the best teams in the world.
Maybe give the 3rd place team – front row tickets to the final?
Posted from United States
By dirk | July 7th, 2006 at 6:07 pm At first I thought a third place game wouldn’t be worth playing and I wondered what value it really has, but the more I think about it, the more I want to get a chance to see the Mannschaft play one more game in this world cup. I think both Germany and Portugal will come to play.
Posted from United States
By Mystique | July 7th, 2006 at 7:51 pm Okay, you guys talked me into it. I will watch Saturday’s game and keep my fingers crossed for Les Bleus on Sunday…. Then all Germans may have to say to Klinsi, or?
Posted from United States
By diego | July 7th, 2006 at 8:09 pm I think there is a difference in the prize $$$ awarded to 3rd and 4th place in the “cosolation” game.
Plus, independent of that, I believe that for a country that has never won the cup, or ever gotten to the finals, it makes a HUGE difference to say: “we managed to finish 3rd in 1962″ as opposed to “we were 4th in 2002″ as this is most likely the highest football accolade your country has.
Ask any fan of Chile, or Portugal, or Bulgaria, or Turkey or Korea if it doesn’t matter.
Posted from United States
By sumyung gei | July 7th, 2006 at 10:34 pm very well said Diego (especially the end)
Posted from Canada
By Arthur | July 7th, 2006 at 11:12 pm well, due to some injuries it’s the mannschaft minus 4 key players, but i’m confident that, in his last game, the titan will keep his net clear
By tuanny | July 8th, 2006 at 5:47 pm Yes, the match for 3rd place is a sideshow or prelude for the Main Event a day later, and a fill-in so we don’t have too many days go by without a game. But I don’t think it’s demeaning for the two teams to play. Now knowing they’re not gonna win the Big Trophy, both teams should be more relaxed, and probably play entertainingly, as Turkey and South Korea did in 2002. Also, it’s always fun to have the host country making this match, as South Korea did then and Germany does today. Something for the natives to cheer about.
Besides, this match makes the total 64, which, well, sounds better than 63.
Posted from United States
By Bolso | July 9th, 2006 at 3:23 am Some of you guys talked about an interactive vote, but most nations have already left the country by the time the teams playing in this match would be picked. By the end of the semi finals, only 4 teams remain in the host country. You’d have to make them come back and stuff, or make all countries stay just in case they are picked..nonsense. Nice idea, though. I like what diego said, made me change my mind on this 3rd place match.
Posted from 
Uruguay
Comments are closed
