I totally agree, it's purely a marketing thing making a new ball for a world cup, and totally unnecessary.

The ball seems to swerve unpredictably when cracked really hard, but doesn't curl as much when kicked with spin. Meaning hit and hope shots might have more chance of going in, but it's a lot harder to try and call the ball over or around a wall of defenders as it just doesn't curve as much like that, hence a complete lack of goals from awesome free kicks in this world cup, which is a real shame!

If you can design a ball that gives more ammunition to players of skill that is great, but this seems to rather be more random, almost negating skill more than magnifying it. That is not a good thing.

The only team that seems to have no problem with it is Germany. Surprise, surprise they've been using it in the Bundesliga for 4 months, meanwhile even if other players were able to get hold of a ball during that tiem they could only have used it in personal practise as every match they played they'd have to be using the balls their competitions have contracts for.


What do you think about the FourFourTwo article Upson Lambasts World Cup Ball?
MATTHEW Upson believes it was "unnecessary" to design a new ball for the World Cup and claims the Jabulani makes it difficult for strikers and defenders to cope with.

Have your say.