Click here for more on this story

Posted: Tue June 9, 1998

Sports Illustrated soccer writer Grant Wahl will answer your World Cup questions through the Finals. Click here to send a question.

Well, it's finally here.

World Cup '98 starts Wednesday, June 10, when Brazil meets Scotland in the shiny new Stade de France outside Paris, and if all goes well I'll be there taking it all in. Thanks to a remarkable bit of planning (OK: pure luck) I flew British Airways over to Paris on Monday night instead of Air France (the official World Cup airline), whose pilots picked a convenient time to go on strike. On the way over I even tried to learn a phrase or two of French (or I might just remain the ugly American, speaking only English and wearing my Yankees hat all the time. We'll see.)

If you're a soccer fan like me, though, the upcoming month will be nothing short of Nirvana. I'll be answering your questions at least once a week from France, and we'll have plenty to talk about, whether it's regarding the United States or other teams. My plan for the first round is to see 10 games in eight cities, including all three U.S. matches as the Yanks try to buck the odds and qualify for the second round.

What's great about the first round? Upsets. Cameroon over Argentina in '90. The U.S. over Colombia in '94. No-name teams always find a way to surprise the heavyweights (and with a record 32 teams in the field it's sure to happen even more frequently this year). Of course, none of them have ever gone on to win the Cup, but such is life. Here are some teams to keep an eye on in the first round: Norway, Chile, Saudi Arabia, Paraguay and Japan. I'll even go so far as to predict an upset-special on Thursday: Chile will beat Italy and set off a wicked chain of events that would pit the Italians against Brazil in the second round. (Note: you still have time to get your World Cup office pool going, so do it!)

Only six countries have ever won the Cup, so my semifinal picks are more established: Brazil, Argentina, France and Germany. I'll go out on a limb and pick France over Argentina 2-1 in the final—the French would be first-time winners.

As the games get going, keep in mind some advice I heard once from a cab driver in Buenos Aires. It was the day after the U.S. had stunned Argentina 3-0 in the '95 Copa America, and I asked him how Argentina could have lost. He shrugged his shoulders and said, "El fútbol es así." That's the way soccer is.

Some things just defy explanation, and that's the wonderful part of the beautiful game. (It's also a hedge to keep me from looking like an idiot when Italy slams Chile 5-1). On to some questions....

Do you think the United States has a chance at beating Germany? Can we make it to the second round?
—Tom Riordan, Lenexa, Kans.

From one Kansan to another, Tom, I don't see it happening. The U.S. has improved immeasurably since '94 (the Yanks actually try to score now), and in talking to Eric Wynalda and Thomas Dooley last week it came across that they really believe they can get to the second round. But I'll be clear: the U.S. was horribly unlucky to have drawn Germany and Yugoslavia in the first round. Germany's only soft spot is its old and creaky defensive line, but its midfield controls the ball far too well to let the U.S. advance into the offensive third with any regularity.

As for Yugoslavia, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Yugos beat the Germans and take the top spot in Group F. They're that good. Anyone who watched Yugoslavia thrash Nigeria 3-0 last week knows how dangerous its attack can be. It comes in waves, and I don't think the three U.S. defenders will be able to contain the pressure. Yugoslavia should reach at least the quarterfinals, and there's no reason it can't make the semis.

That said, I think the U.S. is capable of pulling an upset, and it would likely come against Yugoslavia, which has had a tendency to self-destruct when it gets down. I could see the Americans salvaging a scoreless draw from a tentative Germany in the first match, but if Germany scores at all it will win. Against Iran, it's imperative for the U.S. to pile up as many goals as possible, since the U.S. could advance to the second round with a win and two ties, using the goal-differential tie-breaker. However you look at it, though, it's going to be tough.

In 1990, Cameroon delighted the world. In 1994, Bulgaria was the surprise of the tournament. Who will be this year's Bulgaria or Cameroon, if anybody?
—Mike Pavlick, Pittsburgh

My suggestion: warm up to Chile. Generally thought of as the fourth- or fifth-best team in South America, Chile has a favorable draw (slow-starting Italy in its first game, followed by pedestrian Austria and by-then-eliminated Cameroon) and the tournament's most underrated tandem in strikers Marcelo Salas and Ivan Zamorano. If the rest of the players can make sure the ball is on their feet, you'll see Chile in the quarters.

How concerned are players and coaches about the new tackle-from-behind red-card rule? While the idea is sound, is there concern that the rule will not be applied even-handedly by referees? My own fear is that the powerhouse countries (Italy, Germany, France, England, Brazil) will get away with many illegal tackles, while smaller countries will get players sent off right away. Your thoughts?
—Ahpaly Coradin, Tokyo

Ronaldo will likely be unaffected by FIFA's crackdown on illegal tackling.    (Allsport UK/Allsport)

For those of you who don't know, FIFA has instructed referees to immediately eject any player who commits an illegal tackle from behind, instead of issuing a yellow-card warning as in past years. It's a noble goal, but I have three concerns. One, as you suggest, there's no way a referee is going to eject Brazil's megastar Ronaldo (or more likely, Roberto Carlos) unless he pulls a knife on an opposing player, whereas some grinding defender from Croatia will be gone at the drop of a hat (or the convincing dive of a forward). Two, some referees might enforce the rule more tightly than others. And three, the rule might not get enforced by anyone, and then we'll be back to the dark days of Italy '90 and hackfest scoreless draws.

Let's hope that doesn't happen.

Is U.S. coach Steve Sampson sending the wrong message to his team and followers by playing with only one striker? Yes, it is smart to play defensively, but this team is not known for scoring (see Macedonia) and playing this type of system is not going to promote it.
—Randy Bardock, Lethbridge, England

If I were the coach, Randy, I'd play with at least two forwards. Hell, I'd play with three or four. But if you've seen the U.S. play recently you've noticed that the three designated forwards are either unhealthy (Eric Wynalda is still ailing after knee surgery but will probably start) or incapable (Brian McBride and Roy Wegerle may be superstars against El Salvador and Canada, but against Germany and Yugoslavia? Come on.) Sampson realizes this, so he's decided to use six midfielders to maximize the team's speed on the wings (Frankie Hejduk and Cobi Jones) while giving Claudio Reyna a sound support system to create plays (with midfielder Ernie Stewart, Chad Deering and Brian Maisonneuve).

Wynalda isn't at full-strength, but will probably start at forward for the United States.    (Otto Greule/Allsport)

I disagree with your point that this is a defensive system. As long as Chad Deering and Brian Maisonneuve don't play like defenders—and usually they don't—the 3-6-1 can create scoring opportunities. Of course you need a finisher to make it work. If I had my druthers I would start Preki Radosavljevic up front either by himself or, even better, alongside Wynalda in a 3-5-2. Preki needs to be on the field for 90 minutes. Without a 100-percent Wynalda, Preki is the only dangerous scorer on the entire U.S. team (see the United States' 1-0 win over Brazil in February) and the only American who puts fear in opposing teams.

Do you think the African teams are ready? And which group is the most difficult?
—Sombie Ibrahima, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan

Contrary to popular opinion, I'm not expecting much from the African teams this year. Tunisia, South Africa and Cameroon will be gone in a heartbeat, but the wildcard will be Nigeria. There's no question the Nigerians have loads of talent. The problem is that, with the exception of Taribo West, none of it is on defense. Their coach, Bora Milutinovic, told me as much six weeks ago, and that was before starting keeper Ike Shorunmu broke his arm. Shoronmu's replacement, Abiodum Baruwa, is absolutely horrible. Against Yugoslavia last week he couldn't even get to corner kicks inside the six-yard box, and his bungling of a back-pass led directly to a Yugoslav goal. A 5-1 loss to Holland over the weekend didn't help his cause, either.

To answer your second question, Nigeria happens to be stuck in Group D (the so-called "Group of Death") with Spain, Bulgaria and Paraguay. Any of those four teams would be good enough to take first in the other groups.

Thanks for your questions, everyone, and keep 'em coming. I'll check back in later this week. In the meantime, enjoy the Cup.

Send a question to Grant Wahland come back throughout the World Cup to read more of his responses.  

Related information
Multimedia
Click here for the latest audio and video
Message Boards
Who will win the Cup? Sound off with other users. Check out the CNN/SI Soccer Message Board. Click here for more
Search our site	Watch CNN/SI on cable 24 hours a day
	Sports Illustrated and CNN have combined to form a 24 hour sports news and information channel. To receive CNN/SI at your home call 1-888-53-CNNSI.