Socco-politics

I've been watching a lot of World Cup soccer. It's pretty exciting stuff (once you get over the vuvuzelas). But I was thinking about a way to make the World Cup even MORE exciting.

I think that teams should get an advantage based on geo-politics and their histories. Let's take a look at how this would pan out for the round of 16:

Uruguay vs. South Korea. Ok, bad example... moving on.

Mexico vs. Argentina - another bad example - even if you go back to the Incas

USA vs. Ghana - Well, this was tough, but it looks like the CIA tried to assasinate the Ghanan president at one time. They also destabilized the county's economy. This isn't all that great, but I think the US team should get an extra man for 20 minutes of the game.

England vs. Germany - Ok, this is a tough one to sort out. England beat Germany in two wars - that should warrant a two-goal head start. But, Germany bombed the snot out of London - maybe they get to start the game with a penalty kick to try and even out the score. But, what's this? The royal family are Germans! That bit of sneakery earns them a goal. So - the game starts 2-1, with a German penalty.

Netherlands vs. Slovakia - Another one with not much excitement. The Netherlands are members of NATO while Czechoslovakia were Warsaw Pacters. I guess since NATO won the cold-war "ish" - they might be given a bit of an advantage. Of course, since The Hague is in the Netherlands, they have the right to dispute any referee's call and pass judgement on it.

Japan vs. Paraguay - Seriously? Why couldn't it have been Spain or one of those old-school colonials.

Brazil vs. Chile - again, for countries so close, there isn't that much political history (at least according to Wikipedia). Maybe Chile gets an advantage because the food that sounds like their country (chili) is way better than the Brazillian one (brazil nuts). But then again, maybe Brazil gets an advantage because of Brazillians. But I digress...

Portugal vs. Spain - this is the most epic of all group of 16 matches. Portugal's throne was claimed by a Spaniard in the 1500s. Something like that definitely deserves a 1-goal advantage. But, the Portugese successfully overthrew the Iberian Union in a war, which nullifies the goal advantage.

In summation:
If your country colonized, invaded, seized the throne or bombed the ess out of another country +1 goal.

If your country successfully overthrew tyranny by another country in a violent fashion (none of this constitutional monarchy like Canada) +1 goal.

If your country dumped is prisoners on another country (England-Australia) - +1 goal (author's note: I know this isn't true, but it's fun to make fun of Australians?)

If your country dropped an atomic bomb on another country (applies to US only) - +2 goals. (Japan will NEVER want to face the US in the World Cup)

If your country successfully beat off a much stronger country when they tried to invade - +1 goal (if Vietnam ever plays the US.)

I'm sure there are more rules, but I'll let FIFA sort them out.

Oh - and even better - I think that World Cup results should translate into tangible political advantages. Like, if you beat a nuclear-capable country by more than 3 goals, they have to give you a uranium enricher - think how hard the Iranian team would play.

And just think about the south of France and the Tuscan region in Italy. Due to their terrible performance, they should expect some Kiwi or South African land-owners soon.