Hazard was shown the red card after he appeared to kick the ball boy, who was refusing to give the ball back.

Read the Transcript
The text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

Marco Werman: Did you hear about the highly paid soccer player in England who kicked a ball boy during a game? There’s a video making the rounds and it’s not a pretty sight. Well the player has now been officially charged with violent conduct by the English Football Association and could face a lengthy suspension.

William Troop: That’s not all there is to it, though.

Werman: Okay then. The World’s William Troop is here to tell us more about this bizarre story. So William, what exactly happened?

Troop: Well the game happened just a couple of days ago, on Wednesday, and there were two teams playing in Wales actually. One was a local Welsh team, Swansea. The other is the English team, Chelsea. Very highly paid bunch of players and Swansea was winning and if the scored stayed the way it was, it was Swansea that was going to advance to a final league cup game at Wimbley Stadium. Very prestigious and so time is running out, Chelsea needs to score. The ball goes out and the ball boy gets it and a ball boy, as we all know, is supposed to grab the ball, give it back to the player so they can get on with the business of playing. Well this ball boy didn’t do that. He fell on the ball. The Chelsea player, a Belgian guy named Eden Hazard, came and tried to get the ball. The ball boy just didn’t move and this frustrated player kind of, you know, gave it a little nudge, a little kick, with his foot to the ball which was under the ball boy and got it loose and he thought he was on his way. Well, it didn’t end up that way and this is how the BBC commentary played it.

[clip of BBC commentary] The ball boy seems to have landed on the ball and Hazard is trying to get the ball off him and, well, the ball boy is now rolling around and we’ve got an incident here. It’s a red card that’s being produced and Hazard has been sent off.

Werman: Alright. A red card, that means the player who kicked the ball got ejected. Why did he do this? What’s so? I mean, is it just frustration?

Troop: Well he was just trying to get the ball and try to move on and to be fair, I think, to this player; this ball boy really wasn’t acting the way he’s supposed to act and he was being mischievous himself and this player, Eden Hazard, got very frustrated and he apologized right after the game and we have tape of that too.

[Eden Hazard speaking French, English through BBC interpreter] He was slow to give the ball back. I went to go and get the ball. I might have kicked the boy. I don’t think I did. I apologized in the dressing room. After the game, he came to the changing rooms. He apologized and I apologized.

Troop: So there you have it. They both apologized. They both said they’re sorry. Pretty much unanimous opinion around England is that they both were acting incorrectly and a lot of people say that’s where it should have ended.

Werman: But actually that’s not where it’s ended. It’s gone viral. Everybody’s, well a lot of people, have seen this video now and the player got an automatic three game suspension, but English soccer officials want more.

Troop: Yeah. I mean, they put out a statement today charging Eden Hazard with violent conduct and saying that clearly the suspension that was called for automatically, the three game suspension, would be insufficient. They’re looking like they’re going to hand him a much lengthier suspension. Which, you know, the debate is now on whether this incident really merited it. I mean, I’ve seen the video and it didn’t look that bad.

Werman: Why are they reacting so harshly, do you think?

Troop: I think because there is really a debate throughout soccer, not just in England, about players diving, players saying bad things. In England, they’ve had several scandals involving racist abuse between players and from the stands to players and it’s just getting a bit out of hand and I think this incident kind of just reinforces the notion that soccer, in general, is out of control. I mean, I think to be fair you’ve got to reprimand the ball boy as well.

Werman: Yeah. I was going to say, it looks like ball boys are now following the bad examples of some players.

Troop: The way he rolled around after this little kick from this player, I mean, he must have learned that somewhere and I think he learned it from the players on the field.

Werman: Worthy of an Academy Award nomination. The World’s William Troop, thank you so much.

Troop: You’re welcome.

Copyright ©2012 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.

Anchor Marco Werman speaks with The World’s William Troop about the incident.

The fiscal cliff bill included all sorts of provisions that had little to do with avoiding fiscal catastrophe. My favorite is the one that extends a rum tax that’s almost a century old.

Since 1917, the United States has levied an excise tax on rum imported into the country. That generates hundreds of millions of dollars a year. If the rum comes from U.S. territories Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, the tax revenue goes right back to those territories, where officials use much of it to subsidize rum production.

It’s a neat fiscal trick that currently subsidizes the production of rum giants like Bacardi and Captain Morgan. That production equals jobs in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.

But you could argue that the subsidy gives those giants an unfair competitive advantage in the global marketplace. Which is what rum exporting nations elsewhere in the Caribbean have been saying, since well before the fiscal cliff debate really got going in Washington. They argue that subsidizing multinational corporations like Bacardi and Britain’s Diageo (owner of the Captain Morgan brand) will simply put smaller rum producers out of business.

You don’t have to be rum drinker to think that would be a shame. How did you feel the last time you heard about a new big box outlet driving a Mom-and-Pop store out of business?

Full disclosure: I’m an occasional rum drinker. And my preferred sugar cane-based beverage comes from neither Puerto Rico nor the Virgin Islands. It comes from Nicaragua, and it’s called Flor de Caña. Our guest on the program today, rum expert Edward Hamilton, recommends it, too.

I’m not sure that the company that makes Flor de Caña qualifies as a Mom and Pop operation. The Compañia Licorera de Nicaragua is part of one of the largest corporations in that Central American country.

But my point is it would be a shame if, thanks to U.S. subsidies, the rum industry were reduced to just a few big box-type multinationals, while smaller producers in places like Nicaragua or Jamaica or Barbados struggled.

That wouldn’t be good for a region that has few successful industries to rely on.

“I love you, but my last name goes first.”

(Photo: George Eastman House/Flickr)

Uruguay made news recently when the lower house of its Congress passed a bill called the Marriage Equality Law. The legislation would allow same-sex marriages, and make all marriages equal under the law regardless of the gender of the two people involved.

The bill is expected to gain approval in Uruguay’s Senate as well, and President Jose Mujica says he’s planning to sign it into law. That would make Uruguay only the second Latin American country to officially make gay marriages legal under national law, after Argentina.

That’s a historic change in the making. But there’s another historic change included in that Uruguayan bill, one that hasn’t generated as much attention.

The proposed law would also alter the rules on how babies are named in Uruguay.

Currently, the law in Uruguay says a baby must have two last names, the first from the father’s side of the family and the second from the mother’s. Period, no room for discussion. It’s the way it’s done, by law, in much of Latin America.

The new rules in Uruguay still call for two last names, but would allow couples to change the order of the names. Mother’s could come first, followed by father’s. In the case of a same-sex couple, the partners can choose which last name to use first.

The change seems to be a very straightforward way to truly make all marriages equal, as the bill’s authors intended.

Things get less straightforward if the new parents disagree on the order. If a heterosexual couple can’t agree on which name to list first, it’s back to father’s followed by mother’s. If a gay couple can’t agree on the order, it’s literally down to the luck of the draw.

The proposed naming changes in Uruguay would, of course, only apply to Uruguay. But I have a feeling that they could also open the way for similar changes elsewhere in Latin America.

The “two last names” tradition comes from Spain, where it developed over centuries. The conquistadors spread it to Spain’s many far-flung colonies. And the tradition became law in Spain and other Spanish-speaking places in the 19th century.

But guess what? Spain changed its baby-naming laws back in 1999, allowing mother’s name to come first if both mother and father agree. Seems like lawmakers in Uruguay are just catching up with the old motherland!

Still, the “two last names” convention in Spanish-speaking Latin America is more than just law. It’s engrained in the region’s character. Always the two last names, and always father’s followed by mother’s. It gives each newborn baby a unique identity (most of the time, anyway) and it highlights both sides of the family tree for at least one generation.

The two last names thing is hard for outsiders to digest, though. To many non-Latino Americans, it can seem overly complicated. When they encounter a person with two last names, they never know which to use on second reference. And when should a double last name be hyphenated? Answer: it depends. But that’s for another blog post.

Also, some of Latin America’s children who, officially, have two last names don’t use them both in daily life. I’m one of them.

I was born in Mexico and my birth certificate lists my two last names, father’s followed by mother’s. But living and working in the English-speaking world, I only use my father’s last name. It’s simpler.

Although I did make an exception when I graduated from college. I had both last names put on my diploma as a tribute to my mother, who paid the tuition bills. Thanks Mom!

Follow @wmtroop

Mexico’s top two professional teams are ready for their showdown.

They play each other Thursday and Sunday, in a two-game series, to decide which team will be the national champion.

One of the teams is from Toluca in central Mexico – the other is from the border city we want you to name.

The answer is the Mexican border city of Tijuana which is in the grip of Xolos fever right now.

Xolos are a canine breed that we Americans know as Mexican hairless dogs. But Xolos is also the nickname of Tijuana’s professional soccer team which is battling for the crown of Mexican champion this week.

The World’s William Troop tells anchor Lisa Mullins about the team, and its passionate fans.

• Geo Quiz Podcast on iTunes
• Geo Quiz Podcast via RSS
• The World on Facebook
• Follow @geoquiz
  

Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador is vowing a campaign of civil disobedience now, as The World’s William Troop reports.

In fact, Jovanotti says one of his earliest inspirations was their 1979 hit “Rapper’s Delight”. You can hear the influence in the track “Scappa con Me.”

Italians love the stuff.

But despite his wild success in Europe, Jovanotti has never had an album released in the US until now.

His new CD “Italia 1988 to 2012″ is a collection of songs spanning his career.

Jovanotti, whose real name is Lorenzo Cherubini, has never been purely a rapper in the American sense of the term. He is more like a hip urban poet with a beat, more like Lou Reed than Lil’ Wayne. And his beat an be pretty relentless.

“Sulla Frontiera”, which is one of the newer songs on the CD, is about how modern technology intrudes on our privacy, but at the same time gives us freedom.

But never mind the lyrics. It is the kind of Jovanotti song you can groove to even if you don’t understand Italian.

In recent years, Jovanotti has been coming to the US more and more, especially to New York, a city he says fascinates and inspires him.

For the new CD, the Italian rapper recorded a brand new song in English, a mellower track professing his affection for the Big Apple titled “New York for Life.”

He is not kidding about waking up in New York. Jovanotti says he is moving there this fall and will be touring the US again in October.

So if you don’t know Jovanotti yet, get ready to hear a lot about him.

Subscribe and follow The World’s Global Hit

• Global Hit Podcast on iTunes
• Global Hit Podcast via RSS
• Global Hit Archive (prior to June 2009)
• Global Hit on Facebook
• Follow @wmtroop
  

The source of funding for the restoration project, though, has generated some controversy. $30 million doesn’t sound like a lot, when you’re talking about fixing up one of the most famous historical landmarks on the planet. But faced with the euro crisis, huge debts and a stagnant economy, Italy’s government doesn’t have a cent to spare.

So the $30 million for the Colosseum project is coming from Diego Della Valle, the billionaire owner of luxury shoe and leather goods company Tod’s. Many Italians worried he might try to commercialize the restoration by, say, putting billboards on the ancient amphitheater. But in formalizing Della Valle’s involvement, officials said that won’t happen. And the billionaire himself said he’s only trying to help protect Italy’s cultural heritage.

“We have done this for all the people who work in our group,” said Della Valle. “I think they have the right to expect from a company as ours, which fortunately is doing well, that we show social responsibility.” Della Valle also urged other Italian companies to underwrite similar projects, at other historic sites.

The announcement in Rome came just days after the Italian press ran alarming stories about the Colosseum’s stability. Experts reportedly discovered that the ancient building is tilting to one side. The media dubbed it “the leaning tower of Pisa effect.” But the director of the Colosseum, Rossella Rea, said the tilt happened a long time ago, possibly as a result of earthquakes in ancient times.

And as far as she’s concerned, it’s nothing to worry about. “The monument is very stable,”said Rea. “It is very stable, otherwise we wouldn’t have arranged for the kind of intervention that we are carrying out. We would have obviously opted for a very different course of action.”

The work is expected to last up to three years, and include everything from cleaning and restoring the outside walls to opening up the arena’s basement areas. That’s where historians say gladiators prepared for battle, and where wild animals were held before being set loose on the fighters above. The plan is to open those areas to the public by 2015.

In the meantime, tourists won’t be inconvenienced. The monument will remain open throughout the restoration.

Rome mayor Gianni Alemanno endorses the plan. He says it’s the most significant investment in the Colosseum in decades.

“I believe it is not an exaggeration to say that a restoration of this magnitude and significance has not been carried out on the Colosseum in the past 73 years,” said Alemanno. “A similar intervention was last staged in 1938-39. And since then there have been various small projects but nothing of this level has been carried out in all this time.”

Dictator Benito Mussolini was in charge during that restoration in the late 1930′s, and he spared no expense.

Follow @wmtroop

But many of the protagonists of the euro crisis are battling it out on the soccer field too.

Anchor Marco Werman speaks with The World’s William Troop about the parallels between Euro 2012 and the eurozone crisis.

Read the Transcript
The text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

Marco Werman: Sports are always a good way to take one’s mind off serious matters like the economical crisis, but no such for luck for European soccer fans. They’re closely following the Euro 2012 tournament right now. The games are being played in Poland and Ukraine, but even there the Euro crisis narrative is hard to avoid. The World’s William Troop is following the tournament for us. So, William, we’re at the halfway point now in Euro 2012. Eight teams are moving on to the exciting knockout stages. What does the Euro crisis though have to do with all of this.

William Troop: Well, you have to remember that this is a tournament where nations are represented. Each team represents a country in Europe. And all the big players in the Eurozone crisis are there – Greece, Germany, France, Spain, Italy, I mean everybody. And so when you get certain match-ups it’s just really not to think of what else is going on in the life of these countries, and the big match-up coming up on Friday is Germany against Greece. I mean it can’t get any better than that.

Werman: Right. I mean it’s incredible. And there’s also Italy and Spain involved. This is turning into like the “Euro Crisis 2012 Cup”.

Troop: That’s right. That’s right. It’s really hard to avoid that narrative, as I said.

Werman: Is it different though on the soccer field? I mean does Greece really stand a chance in the knockout round?

Troop: Let me think about that. No. Actually Greece is very much the underdog. They are kind of the feisty team that has the battle really to advance, whereas Germany, it looks a little bit like they’re on cruise control and, like almost every tournament that Germany plays in, the question is “Can Germany be stopped?” But really you have to give the Greeks a little more credit than that. They are a disciplined lot out in the field and that kind of the reverse of the stereotypes that are common in Europe right now about Greece and the financial crisis. When Greece takes the field in a soccer match they’re actually quite efficient. They have very few chances and so far they have taken them and scored, so watch out Germany.

Werman: So what do the players make of all this?

Troop: Well, I’ll just quote one Greek player who spoke to the press yesterday and he said, “This is bad. We’re just players and we’re playing a game we love and all this hoopla about the Euro crisis being injected into this game is just counter to what it’s supposed to be about which is eleven guys out there trying to score a goal.”

Werman: Right. Well, let me put you out on a limb, William, and ask you whether you think the tough economic challenges in some of these countries are actually raising the game level on the pitch?

Troop: Well, actually they might be. So far this tournament has been pretty exciting with a lot of these interesting match-ups coming down to the wire where somebody has to score or they go home and there have been some surprises soccer-wise. The Netherlands, a big soccer power in Europe, they went home defeated three times in a row. So this tournament is kind of open for anybody to win, though everybody expects the big final to be the two best teams coming into the tournament, which is Germany and Spain – another match-up that has echoes of the Eurozone crisis.

Werman: Right. So that’s a conventional wisdom. Are you hoping for any particular final?

Troop: What I’m hoping for is surprises. I’m hoping that the teams that you expect to win don’t, and that we see kind of an unusual final like Portugal and Italy. I’m a big Italy fan, so I’m really hoping for Italy to make it to the final.

Werman: Well, whoever wins, one thing is for sure, they’re not going to have to bail anybody out. The World’s soccer connoisseur, William Troop. Thank you as always.

Troop: You’re welcome.

Copyright ©2009 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.

Brazil had initially balked at allowing beer sales in stadiums. Alcohol has been banned at Brazilian games since 2003. The ban was introduced as part of measures to tackle violence among rival fans and hooliganism. Seems like a reasonable step to me.

But soccer’s global governing body FIFA demanded that Brazil change its laws to allow beer sales.

“Alcoholic drinks are part of the FIFA World Cup,” said FIFA General Secretary Jerome Valcke on a visit to Brazil earlier this year. “Excuse me if I sound a bit arrogant, but that’s something we won’t negotiate,” Valcke added for good measure.

Oh, did I mention that Budweiser is a major FIFA World Cup sponsor?

And in fact, Brazilian federal authorities have now consented. But apparently, they’ve done so with a measure that does not give FIFA a blank check on the matter.

State laws around Brazil still prohibit beer sales in local stadiums. So FIFA may still need to negotiate with individual states where World Cup stadiums are located.

But let’s assume that come 2014, when Brazil finally hosts actual World Cup matches, beer will indeed flow in the country’s stadiums. FIFA says it has the right to do so, and few governments out there have the backbone required to stand up to soccer’s powers that be.

Now, I have been known to enjoy a beer now and then at sporting events here in the US. I admit it’s a nice option to have for responsible fans.

But beer is not essential for the enjoyment of the game. In fact I would say it distracts from it. So I view alcohol at games as a luxury, not a right.

If authorities told me that there’s a real risk that alcohol consumption could lead to violence at a game, I would be the first to hand in my plastic cup.

In Brazil, the authorities know that there’s a risk of violence associated with alcohol. There’s a history of it in the country.

Yet FIFA prefers to ignore that, perhaps to keep its sponsors happy. I hope they, and soccer fans, don’t end up regretting it.

Follow @wmtroop

Another sign is the huge match-fixing scandal roiling the waters of Italian soccer. It recently erupted in all its ugliness, with some top level players arrested on charges that they conspired with a shadowy betting syndicate to alter the course of several games. Prosecutors say the whole scheme was directed by a Singapore-based tycoon.

The reaction of one Italian coach, who works in Ireland, was emblematic of how many in Italy view such scandals. “As an Italian,” said Giovanni Trapattoni, “the first feeling is that we are mocked abroad. We are always linked with illicit dealings.”

Another recent scandal that’s generated some mocking commentary around the globe is the one known as Vati-leaks. I know, technically the Vatican isn’t Italy. But humor me.

Vati-leaks is centered on allegations of corruption at the Holy See. The documents that were leaked came from the Pope’s own household. And the leaker it turns out, was a member of what the Catholic Church calls the Pope’s “family”: the butler.

But if the butler did in fact do it, few think he acted alone. He’s now promising to cooperate with investigators. Maybe the good butler will lead them to someone higher up, like a cardinal, who might be behind all the intrigue. The Vatican says it’s all part of a vicious personal attack on the pontiff.

Before all of the above, it was the economy that most worried Italians. Sure, it’s not as bad as in Greece or Spain. But Italy’s economy is in serious peril, overwhelmed by high levels of government debt and high unemployment. Young Italians despair about ever being able to make a decent living.

The government of former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi collapsed because it was unwilling to make the hard decisions needed to keep Italy from becoming the next Euro basket case. But Berlusconi wasn’t alone in his denial. Most Italian politicians, on both the right and the left, were equally guilty. Many Italians were left with a sense that the whole political system had failed them.

That’s why the country is now in the hands of technocrats, led by current Prime Minister Mario Monti. Italians simply needed some common sense leadership to steer them out of the mess.

Monti and his ministers don’t mince words. They will say if benefits promised to union workers in the past are now too onerous for the Italian state. If employment rules have the effect of keeping young workers out of the work force, they try to change them.

So leave it to Mario Monti to say the common sense thing when it comes to that soccer match-fixing scandal. He suggested that Italian soccer should just stop for 2 or 3 years. “It’s not a government proposal,” he said, “just something I wish for as a fan who loved when soccer was just soccer.”

But it seems to be about more than just soccer to me. I think Italy needs to stick to its common sense cure, and apply it liberally whenever humans fail to do the right thing.

Most Mexicans are desperate for a change, and fed up with a drug war that’s left tens of thousands dead.

According to the latest polls, the vote could usher the PRI back to power. That’s the old ruling party, which was booted out of office in 2000 after a seven-decade hold on the presidency.

The next big event in the campaign is a televised candidates debate on Sunday. Yet, despite the high stakes, many Mexicans will be watching something else.

The debate, scheduled for 8:00 p.m. on Sunday night, will be carried by several TV stations. But not by Mexico’s two biggest channels.

One, Televisa’s Channel 2, is sticking to its original programming – a dance competition for kids that’s wildly popular with viewers.

The other, owned by TV Azteca, is showing a playoff game between two of Mexico’s top soccer teams, Monarcas and Tigres.

Election officials want the game rescheduled. But they’re not declaring the debate a national priority, which could compel all TV stations to carry it. Instead, they’ve opted to ask politely.

The head of the Federal Election Institute told reporters it would be nice if the game took place at another time.

But that’s not going to happen. Ricardo Salinas Pliego, the head of TV Azteca, replied with a Twitter message: “If you want to see the debate, watch Televisa (Channel 5). If you want soccer, watch TV Azteca. I’ll show you the ratings later.”

Si quieren debate, véanlo por Televisa, si no, vean el fútbol por Azteca. Yo les paso los ratings al día siguiente.

— Ricardo B Salinas P (@RicardoBSalinas) April 30, 2012

“It’s clear that soccer is going to win,” said Mexican author and political commentator Guadalupe Loaeza.

She says many Mexicans just aren’t interested in what their politicians are saying anymore.

“We are so demoralized, we are so bruised emotionally, that of course we need distractions,” said Loaeza. “Of course we’re up to here with politics. I asked my own husband if he was planning to watch the debate. And he said, I think I’ll watch the soccer game. Naturally I shot him a dirty look, and he backed down. But unfortunately the TV executive is right. In the end, sports will always get more viewers than politics.”

That’s a shame, because the debate is an important moment in the presidential race. The front-runner, the PRI’s Enrique Pena Nieto, is a young, handsome career politician who’s prone to gaffes when he speaks off the cuff.

So the debate is a golden opportunity to see Pena Nieto under pressure, away from his pre-packaged campaign appearances.

Loaeza blames the media for encouraging Mexico’s politicians to market themselves as products, putting more value in a shiny package rather than actual policy ideas.

She’s not the only one blaming the media. This morning on Mexico City’s W Radio, political analyst Mauricio Merino said Mexico’s 2012 presidential election campaign will be remembered for the way the media trivialized politics.

Follow @wmtroop

I can certainly understand that four years in a high-stakes, high-pressure job can wear a man down. Just look at what happens to US presidents in four years. Never mind, managing FC Barcelona is much harder!

Jokes aside, Pep Guardiola’s place in soccer history is guaranteed. He is credited with creating perhaps THE most beautiful expression of the beautiful game. Watching his Barcelona team pass the ball from side to side, waiting for the perfect moment to strike, was like watching a cobra lulling its victim into a quick death.

So the question is: can Pep’s beautiful Barça survive without him? We won’t know for sure until Barcelona plays a season or two under a new coach. The man named to replace Guardiola seems well-placed to keep following the same path. He is Tito Vilanova and, like Guardiola, he’s a product of the Barcelona Academy.

Homegrown talent has been the key to success under Guardiola, and can continue to be after him. The sheer number of fantastic players that has emerged from Barcelona’s youth system is so high that some feel Barcelona would have been great these past four years even without Guardiola.

I give the man more credit than that. He helped to elevate his players, managed their ups and downs, brought new young players up from the youth ranks. He wasn’t perfect, though. Barcelona did lose some big games over the past four years. And at times it seemed Guardiola did not have a Plan B for those games when the short-pass, constant ball possession style didn’t work.

But in the end, Barcelona’s success was based on the players. Guardiola’s genius was adapting his system of play to their strengths. In announcing his departure, Guardiola said that he’d imagined a million games in his head – but it was the players who turned his ideas into reality.

Those Barcelona superstars – Lionel Messi, Xavi and Andres Iniesta form the core of the team — are still there. They won’t forget how to play overnight. They have every intention to start winning again.

Just beware Barcelona: The trouble is likely to start when those players age into retirement. Someone will need to decide who comes next, and how they should play. That’s when the club will likely miss Pep Guardiola the most.

Follow @wmtroop

The film begins with cardinals from all over the globe gathering at the Vatican for a pope’s funeral. Then comes the new pontiff’s election behind closed doors in the Sistine Chapel.

It all looks like the real thing, and that’s how the director wanted it. Moretti said he researched real conclaves and real cardinals so he could build a realistic framework for what he called a “non-realistic” film.

“I would say it’s a dramatic comedy,” said Moretti. “Better yet, a painful comedy. Or an ironic drama.”

That ironic drama emerges early. As the cardinals gather to select a new pope, it’s clear they don’t know who to choose. And not one of them wants the job. Each cardinal begins to pray, begging God not to pick him.

But after a number of ballots, a new pope is chosen. He’s a back-bencher, a French cardinal no one seemed to notice before. You can tell he’s not thrilled, but all seems to be going as planned.

That is until the crucial moment, when the new pontiff is supposed to be presented to the faithful crowding St. Peter’s Square. A scream cuts the presentation short. It’s the new pope, having a nervous breakdown.

He can’t face the crowd, and retreats into his quarters. A psychiatrist, played by Nanni Moretti himself, is called in by the Vatican to help the pope overcome his doubts and insecurities. But it doesn’t work as planned.

In coming up with that scenario, Moretti was inspired by something he learned about the men who have become popes in the recent past.

“All those cardinals, at the moment that they became pope, claimed to feel terrified, not ready, inadequate,” said Moretti. “Even Ratzinger said that,” he continued, referring to Pope Benedict’s name before he was elected pontiff.

Moretti described himself as a lapsed Catholic and a non-believer. He said that allows him to give his on-screen pope and cardinals more humanity.

And that offers a clue as to what Moretti is really getting at with this movie. He wasn’t really out to send Catholic authorities a message. He wanted to highlight something all human beings can relate to.

“This film is about our struggle to fulfill roles that others assign us, or that are assigned to us by fate, or by God for those who believe. Or that we assign ourselves,” said Moretti. “This is a theme in many of my movies. There is always a gap between what we ask ourselves to do, and what we are actually able to do.”

“We Have a Pope” came out last year in Europe. It’s United States release is scheduled for Good Friday, in New York and Los Angeles.

Follow @wmtroop

Many people in this country remember Chinaglia for his scoring prowess as a New York Cosmos player from 1976 to 1983. But Chinaglia was already one of my heroes before he ever put on a Cosmos jersey.

I first heard of Giorgio Chinaglia when I was 7 years old. My family had just moved to Rome, Italy. And there was this professional soccer team called Lazio that had just come out of nowhere to become one of the best in Italy. Chinaglia was its larger-than-life leader, and a shoe-in for becoming my hero.

As a very young outsider in Italy, I was pleased to learn that Chinaglia was sort of an outsider, too. He was the son of immigrants who left Italy for a new life in Wales when Chinaglia was just a boy. I could definitely relate to that. Of course, it also helped that my new hero and his Lazio team were scoring lots of goals and winning lots of games at the time. I can honestly say that the day they won Italy’s national soccer championship in 1974 was one of the happiest moments of my young life.

I know, I sound like a Cubs fan or something. Little did I know back in the 70′s that I was signing up for a lifetime of ups and downs (mostly downs) supporting a team that seems to always fall apart at key moments of the season.

My adoration of Chinaglia didn’t last long. His fall from hero status began right after that championship season in 1974. Chinaglia was part of the Italy National Team that traveled to West Germany for the 1974 World Cup.

The team struggled, and in one game Chinaglia was substituted by the coach. My hero wasn’t happy. I watched on my little black and white TV set (color came much later to Italian TV) as Chinaglia stormed off the field, while very publicly telling the coach where to go (a rude hand gesture was involved).

I tried to forgive him, with all the earnestness of a 9-year-old fan. But things were never the same for Chinaglia after that. Exiled from the national team, he still gave his all for Lazio. But the team declined and was never able to recapture the magic (at least not for another 26 years).

Then in 1976, Chinaglia stunned me and all Lazio fans by announcing he was leaving to play soccer in the United States. This was at a time when most foreign players in the US were more than likely already over the hill (sorry, Pelé, just saying). Chinaglia was definitely not over the hill yet. To me, it was a betrayal. I still remember thinking in disgust, “He did it for the money!”

I only realized much later that maybe coming to America to play soccer was a challenge that Giorgio Chinaglia couldn’t resist. Yes, he made a lot of money. But I think he also felt that he had nothing left to prove in Italy anyway.

He wanted a bigger stage, and perhaps to prove that he was better than Pelé and all the other stars who were hired to transform soccer in the US into a major sport. Chinaglia did have a huge ego, but he backed it up with goals on the soccer field. He was by far the all-time leading scorer in the old North American Soccer League (NASL), with 243 goals in 256 games.

Now, I’m not arguing Chinaglia was better than Pelé. But I did notice one thing: in remembering Chinaglia on the Cosmos website yesterday, the club called him “the New York Cosmos’ greatest player ever.”

Follow @wmtroop

Israel pioneered the field, and is a major player in the global market for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Not only do the Israelis make a full range of drones for their own military and security purposes, they sell their pilotless aircraft far and wide. Israeli clients range from Azerbaijan to the United States, which has used Israeli-made surveillance drones along the border with Mexico. We’re talking unarmed drones, not the Predators loaded with missiles that the US uses to target suspected terrorists in places like Pakistan and Yemen.

Washington isn’t against selling drones either, even the armed ones. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that the Obama Administration is pushing to sell US-made armed drones to NATO allies like Turkey and Italy. Britain has already purchased some. Some in Congress object to spreading the lethal technology around. But the reality is that several countries, including Iran and China, are thought to be developing their own armed drones.

This proliferation of drones is evident closer to home too. Many of our neighbors in the Western Hemisphere have them.

Brazil, for example, employs drones for all kinds of law enforcement surveillance, especially in its remote Amazon region. Remotely-piloted aircraft come in handy when tracking drug traffickers or illegal logging operations. Brazil uses both locally-designed aircraft, and ones imported from Israel. The Brazilian government is said to be planning to use UAVs to beef up security when it hosts the 2014 soccer World Cup and the 2016 Summer Olympics.

Then there’s Mexico. The United States has been flying surveillance drones south of the border, too, as part of its efforts to help the Mexican government’s war against the narcos. But Mexico has also bought its own drones from Israel in the past, and there’s speculation that it’s about to get some more (bigger ones, perhaps). I suspect officials will have to spend an increasing amount of time coordinating the unmanned flight patterns near the US-Mexico border.

Israel isn’t the only country eyeing the Latin American drone market. Apparently, so is Iran. US Air Force Gen. Douglas Fraser recently told reporters in Washington that Iran is planning to help build drones in Venezuela. The general reportedly said those drones are likely to be limited in capacity. Translation: probably not armed, and probably not capable of flying missions to the United States. But you never know, and I’m sure the Pentagon is keeping a nervous eye on that evolving situation.

The fact that so many countries are using unmanned aircraft makes me nervous. I’m not expecting hostile drones over US cities anytime soon. And more use of surveillance drones in Latin America could help governments win a few more battles against the drug cartels. But clearly we’re headed toward a world where pretty much everyone is keeping an eye on everyone else from the sky. Actually, we’re there already. The technological edge the United States may have had in this area is melting away.

What comes next is even more worrisome. This is a global arms race that’s been going on quietly in the background for some time now. It could get much louder, if armed drones become more widespread. We Americans may have grown used to our government using remote-controlled aircraft to kill suspected terrorists. That’s meant to make us feel safer. But I suspect the world is going to feel less safe as more countries acquire that same capability.