tv Charlie Rose Bloomberg July 7, 2015 6:00pm-7:01pm EDT
♪ >> from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: greek voters took to the polls on sunday. a referendum last week. the vote resulted in a resounding rejection of austerity. more than 60% voted against the terms set by the international creditors. officials warned greece could be ejected from the eurozone. prime minister singh burress hailed the result as a brave choice and also said greece would go back to the negotiating table. megan green is the chief
economist at asset management. the senior fellow in international -- of international economics. and the president and founder of eurasia group, i am pleased to have them on this program. megan let me start with you in athens. what is the aftermath to this vote? megan: there is still a sense of defiance. it became really clear the new vote was going to win and people said, at least we are standing up to the creditors. when i woke up this morning, the lines at the atm's were even longer. there was concern about what this means. tomorrow, euro zone leaders will get together in brussels and try to hand out an idea. i think that is probably not likely especially in light of this no vote. charlie: your reaction to this vote and what it means for the rest of us? >> there are many mysteries and one of them is that the greeks apparently think the reason they
have not get -- gotten better terms from creditors before is because they lacked some kind of democratic mandate or something. they thought if they had this referendum, it supported that position, that the government could get better terms. the real problem greece is not getting better terms is german politics and not greek politics. if you had a referendum in germany saying should we have more for those greeks, i guarantee you they would not want to. i think the greece are coming back -- i do not think they will get better treatment. i think if they don't, the lines outside the greek banks will get longer and longer and maybe as soon as tomorrow evening, perhaps wednesday, the greek banks will simply have zero euros left to give out. at that point, you have no banking system, no payment system, and an economy operating and that is when it gets extremely nasty, pensioners who neither money from atm cannot go by food.
then i think you see quickly a move toward government having to institute some kind of script and that is the beginning of the exit from the eurozone. charlie: you are not as pessimistic? >> i am not quite as pessimistic and i think sebastian's right one of the reasons we have not gotten a deal so far is because the germans have taken a tough line position on continued greek austerity and reforms and labor force pensions, they look to complete come to the table on. that is not the only issue. we also have the fact the greek government lacked complete legitimacy in greece. they had a serious problem within their own party and a strong left-wing helping to sabotage their own internal process. literally loathed by every into lock order they had in europe. they have come through with 61%
from a referendum. they have gotten rid of their minister in finance, they actually brought the establishment opposition parties together to say they will together, five parties, bring a new proposal to the european states tomorrow. charlie: it will be a proposal more likely to be agreed to by the creditors? ian: we have already heard from the french today there is a greater willingness to accept reduction debt forgiveness as a part of this negotiation. will they go farther than they have in the past? i think they will impart because he does not have to worry he will potentially lose his government and office at home. part of the new gift -- the difficulty with the germans, that is his own differences at home and he has decisively resolved that. this imf report last week 60 billion euros in a transition
those things have legitimized sippers and allowed him to play a stronger hand with the europeans. charlie: sebastian, i was listening to something on the radio. a story that the finance minister is a game theorist by training. sebastian: he does not seem to be playing this particular game very well. the reissued version of his book on game theory, which i'm told will be out imminently, will sell very well. charlie: ok. who forced him out? the party, sippers, who? sebastian: sippers was in a position where he was on the one hand saying, let's vote against the nasty creditors, and at the same time saying as soon as you vote no, you will get a deal. he had to square that circle and what he has done is throw the finance minister overboard, toxic to the creditors.
he is hoping that is enough of a concession to create goodwill around the negotiating process. i think it is helpful to have switched finance ministers. the joke is one of them was a trained marxist and the other wasn't oxford university trained marxist. i am not sure it makes a huge difference accused the creditors of blackmail. so we will see. it is a step in the right direction or i am doubtful it is enough. charlie: will they leave the eurozone? sebastian: i am 80% chance they will. megan: it all depends on rep -- whether angela merkel has the courage to put debt relief on a table despite the fact her whole government is vehemently against it. she has 80% approval ratings in germany. i think it is not likely she will based on previous experience. i think the real trey burke -- real trigger will be the banks.
greek does the ecb 3.5 billion euros on july 20. the ecb will recall, banks insolvent and demand a resolution plan. i think the greek government will have to start printing a legal tender and i think that will be the avenue through which greece affectively has to leave the eurozone. >> there is no question even if greece is in a stronger position with a more unified party in greece, the germans have to come to the table. merkel was not as popular today in germany as her finance minister who absolutely is ready for a greek exit and has been pushing as hard as he can. having said that, it is france today sitting down, the french president sitting down with angela merkel, and they would like to see a way out of this process. germans may be leaders but
they're not acting by themselves. while merkel has been prepared to accept the grexit, she does not want to bear responsibility for it to her chu wants the greeks to show a level that forces them out. she is -- she does not want them out but was increasingly prepared to accept a greek exit if it was greece's's fault. that narrative has been lost at this point. charlie: let's assume they exit the eurozone. what happens to the membership in the european union? >> they still have very significant debts in the euro nominated. they would expect the economy would attract a further 40% over the six-month, down the 26% they have already attracted. they are not in export driven economy. it is absolutely devastating for greece at least in the near term. let's keep in mind sippers has
said very strongly and has been accept internationally, that the no vote was not about the grexit. it was about the austerity being placed in front of them. that was something a week ago that no one was prepared to accept and today, not only to all the greek people accept it, but a lot of international communities are saying that is it reasonable -- a reasonable position to take. austerity limits the path that would grow. ian: this is why the imf report is very important. what had been turning toward yes sippers gives a big increase. the imf says they would not support a bailout. 260 billion euros --
charlie: will the greeks in your judgment become more responsible , to use one word used by creditors? sebastian: one problem is debt forgiveness has become in this debate. greeks have been saying, we need it and germans have been saying, we're not getting it. the truth is most of the debt we are talking about has been rescheduled such that there are no big payments on it. in the last week and coming out through july payments are massive because greece is flat broke. in the grand scheme of the debt a lot of the debt has gotten zero payments for the next two ears. -- years. the problem would be the greeks still need fresh new money. to keep the banks functioning for example, they need fresh
support from the central bank in frankfurt. that is the problem. it is about fresh aid. charlie: what interests me most of all is whatever kind of financial engineering has to take place, what is necessary for the greek economy to get on a sustaining growth pattern? megan: greece needs to open up its product and labor markets. in the short-term, that really undermines growth and is really painful. it only starts to bite in the medium to long-term. right now is not a great time for the greek economy to try to implement those kinds of changes. the biggest irony in all of this is the no vote supposedly stood for no more austerity. actually, the greek government if it gets a deal, will have to accept much more austerity than it would have had two had it agreed a week and a half ago. the economy will have attracted some of more now that they are capital control, particularly in the middle of the season, so important to the greek economy.
the focus had been on austerity and it should have been on structural reform but the timing is off, unfortunately. ian: megan is right. it is not an economic issue. a political issue. excepting that deal would not get to parliaments in greece. the massive risk is a consequence and sippers would have found itself on its ear. now, a deal is much more acceptable domestically. big things happen over the last week that a lot of domestic political risk you have taken off the table. have you taken any of it off the table for the germans or the other interlocutors with europe? charlie: political risk because this is an unpopular thing to do? ian: it is incredibly unpopular. selected with 36% of the popular vote, they were a divided party that you had the left wing prepared to hold the prime minister for ransom for getting a deal done. it is massively euro skeptic.
sippers has made very clear it did not want grexit from day one. they have been consistent. have also seen who was in charge of greece and was in charge of the relatively established democracy party, you now have new leadership in the party prepared to actually bring a deal together with the greek government. this is very different looking to domestic violence then it was before the referendum. that is a positive side. charlie: there are different political environments after this referendum because the people have said they support what they are trying to do. ian: sippers's's response to that has been, let's consolidate the politics. sebastian: i worry we will be in a situation, if we do have banks that cannot be opened unless you issue some kind of script, you will be in hyperinflation potentially quite soon.
what will happen is the government does not want to impose austerity, or cut spending, but revenue will collapse because of the kind of chaos around the currencies people will be even less inclined to pay taxes in greece than they already are. you will have a big fiscal deficit. you can't borrow under those circumstances, you will print money to even the expectation that you might do that is going to cause the new script to devalue and then the government will have to raise interest rates a heck of a lot to have to prevent that evaluation of the new greek currency. if you did raise interest rates, you would be imposing more austerity on the domestic economy. once you start to leave in an environment of zero credibility around policymaking, then i think you have no good options left. the stories of a kind of long weekend in estonia, it causes you to come up with the new currency. you introduce it with some
than louisiana. not only is it small, it is not interconnected in the financial market. if you think about the lehman brothers story, where one financial institution turned out to have massive repercussions the rest of the financial system globally was so into connected -- interconnected. greece is the opposite. the private creditors left long ago. debts are owed basically to the civil sector, though i do not see a lot of contagion. ian: i think sebastian is right about all this but angela merkel is aware of all of it. the issue is if you have a unified greece and a unified policy in greece that is then forced out effectively by the germans refusing to watch, that the geopolitical response is going to be very different. then you have a question of the greek government saying the european model does not work for us we are turning to russia, we
are turning to china we are going to be a very different orientation. charlie: turning to china because they will find a natural friendship, a natural bond? ian: i would not necessarily say an economic model but the willingness of chinese to put infrastructure in place and to establish as a consequence, a number of shared standards with the greeks, which ultimately undermined what had been a unified and political economics race in europe. the same thing from us -- a security perspective had been a nato member. it hard for me to imagine that relationship is going to maintain itself long-term that relationship with nato. putin does not want to put 10 or $20 billion in place for the greeks. if putin could suddenly have a
base on the mediterranean, that looks like a win and pretty exciting and his perspective. megan: i have to say i totally disagree there will be any contagion from a greece exit from a eurozone p i think a grexit would be a leading event with a much slower fuse. precedent for countries exiting the eurozone, the currency area is turned into a currency peg in the next time italy and spain stopped growing, especially italy, i think they will decide they would rather benefit from a devaluation return to growth rather than a poisonous restriction reform. then we will have a bigger country like italy and spain refused -- choosing to leave the eurozone and that will be hugely disruptive for the market. ian: i certainly agree with that. long-term, all of this is horrible for europe irrespective. you have a chronic environment. the europe that have been built
for, political and economic values had been built to strengthen european in patients so you could have the euro as a pool -- a global currency and all of that is being thrown away. what it means to be a part of europe is weaker than what it used to be. and the relationship is weaker than it was in the last 25 years. it may be good for the u.s. dollar in the near term. long-term, it is not good for america'top ally to go through this trauma. almost -- obama may be talking about the fact that we would like them together house in order, but he is on the sidelines as much as the brits are at this weight. charlie: because he does not want to be? ian: is europe -- if europe is as important, do you think he would spend this much time --i do not see that ever. charlie: has the u.s. lost its interest in what happened in europe? ian: i think they are sitting on the sidelines. charlie: is that a comment on us? ian: of course to long-term, we
will pay the price. -- if either of these scenarios megan or sebastian are talking about come into play, ultimately, -- charlie: from the perks you had, is it time to say forget your dreams of a politically and economically integrated europe? sebastian: i would have a slightly different take. i think the problem, if greek -- if greece does leave and go through a painful time, which i believe it would, the message to other countries inking of leaving would not be encouraging. they do not want to leak all of that going through all that pain. if you think that 21997, the experience of that or indonesia having a resolution of consequence basically thought -- taught all the emerging markets they had massive central bank richard -- reserves. i think if greece went through a
terrible time maybe with hyperinflation and certainly with a lot of a misery the message in spain is do not vote for a populous party. if you want a long-term concern, and i'm watching after this crisis, the follow-up question is what lessons do the big countries in europe derive, in terms of the kinds of fiscal transfers you need to make a currency union operate? in the future there will be a country that is less competitive and therefore runs a trade deficit. that deficit will be financed by capital inflows. if you do not want those to blow up in a crisis, you need to have with the united states has to make the dollar unit function namely and unemployment system that transfers money from a state to state that really
needed in a crisis. federal deposit insurance of the banks. you need all of these stabilization mechanisms and that is what it needs to do in the future to make it work. charlie: megan, i do not know if you wanted to jump in? megan: even before they get to these kinds of fiscal and political unions, which will take decades in my view if ever they could do something by adjusting as well. so far, it is just weaker countries having to adjust and a stronger countries are not adjusting at all. that ensures there is no demand across the eurozone. when i bring this up with my contacts in the german government they point out that germany is not growing much either. so this approach is not really working out for germany. a look at me like i have 40 heads and they say, he is an obsession and who needs gross if you have a balanced budget? i do not think that approach will change but it certainly would help. charlie: you have been talking
about chinese markets, i assume and what they might do about that. but how do they view this? ian: it is interesting. europe does not play significantly in china right now. they do not have a lot of experience with it. if you talk to the russians, they look at europe every day and they, hot, there is a dynamic. the chinese are just not there. they go to germany a lot, and they are delighted a lot of europeans are doing great deals with them and coming on board with the infrastructure bank. with the chinese this week, it is much more about their own market and what they are trying to do domestically to balance a more open economy with the needs to appease and placate investors. charlie: beyond that concern with domestic issues, is that taking place in parallel with
looking at the development of these islands, that a larger navy, looking at more clear signs that china wants to be playing in every arena? >> what the chinese intend to do internationally is overwhelmingly focus on economics right now. because that is where their power is. it is really aligned with the chinese internet, the chinese state-owned enterprises, selling more stuff come improving technology. cyber strategy is aligned with industrial policy. the cyber strategy is to grab as much as they can that allows them to get higher value transfer from western multinational and chinese multinationals. hillary clinton came out two days ago and set the chinese are trying to steal everything that is not bolted down. i guess that includes her e-mail account, but you know, this is the reality.
u.s. and china are at virtual war with each other. they are not virtually at war but they are at virtual war. charlie: it is moving in the cyber world. ian: without any question. our ability to think her it this far has been virtually zero. it is in areas issue and a bigger issue of an international 30 active than anything we're talking about today on greece. greece will maintain the headlines because the chinese really like it that way. charlie: any possibility china and russia will find some additional relationship? ian: i think yes. the chinese are buying massive amounts of russian material to the chinese are also investing billions of dollars to build infrastructure into russia that they hope will eventually go beyond russia and through the middle east, through europe, through turkey you name it. that is a big deal. right now, the chinese the
russians as a very useful strategic partnership that over time will give them more influence against us-led global standards. i think he likes it. sebastian: there was a time when the brick acronym was everywhere all the time. this idea of a brazil, russia, india, china alliance that has fizzled out a bit and what you have got instead is the asian infrastructure investment tank -- bank, a global initiative, a different animal not particularly aimed at roping in other members of the ric club at all. it would imply less interest and more trying to emerge on the stage, and playing on that way instead. charlie: so planning the united
states in what way? sebastian: i think initially, china would have liked to have had more influence in the world bank. there is a little bit of a cap on that because of the old u.s. european duopoly in controlling these institutions. one china found itself frustrated in getting the world bank putting in world bank money , they said fine, we will set up our own institution. i think that is something we should welcome. the chinese will apparently set it up on a model that is world bank governance but slightly improved. i did not see it as particularly challenging. i think it is come for memory to the institutions we have it to the extent they are open to western shareholders to come in, i think we want china to join
the multilateral, multinational system. we do not want to freeze them out. if setting up an infrastructure bank is their form of challenging the global order that is the kind of challenge i can live with very happily. charlie: a wrong decision by the u.s. ian: chinese american officials have made it very clear there is no chance that what sebastian just suggested would happen in the u.s. anytime soon. he is rated would be great, but they will stay on the sidelines and will be seen as off -- oppositional. sebastian: i think a said western, not american. my point is britain and a lot of other western countries have agreed to join it. charlie: instantly. ian: and the chinese think japan will join. that is interesting. megan: i think that is unlikely. ian mentioned everything in china this focus on the economy. everything focused on -- in china is on debt. that relates to the conversation we had earlier in europe here we live in a world where central
bankers are the only ones intervening anywhere. very active in the past couple of months and everyone thinks it is so gross in china. i think that is wrong. i think they're trying to figure out how to get money for local governments without bailing them out. the worst-case scenario for china is that they have cascading defaults and the statehouse steps in and dealt them out. it is not the end of the world but we know in the u.s. how painful that could be. that is what china's immediate focus is. charlie: look at the greek debt crisis and how it unfolded. whose reputation was enhanced and whose suffered? let's talk about christine lagarde, mario draghi, alexis tsipras and angela merkel? whose reputation among all of those was enhanced? sebastian: angela merkel here i think has been viewed
reelected, popular in her own country. i think if greece does crash out of the eurozone, some of that glow will wear off. a decision not to make the argument to the german electorate early on that you had to be more generous to greece because if you were not more generous, you would push them into the arms of populace and get the kind of austerity we now see. i see the mess in greece as a blemish on angela merkel's long-term reputation. charlie: what about christine lagarde? >> i think she is doing fine. early on, the imf was complacent in saying that reform programs in greece would work. they have not worked. but that was before her time. i think she is now doing the right thing. mario draghi, so far, so good.
he has been a hero so far since he came in. pushing down peripheral bond spread. he has got a tough decision. he does not want to be the precipitating factor forcing greek banks to close completely. and by cutting them off. he does not want to have his fingerprints on the final but i think he could manage that and for his political leadership in europe to take the responsibility, which is really there is in the end. i think mario draghi comes out very well. charlie: do you disapprove of that, megan, and tell me how you think this changes the fortunes of alexis tsipras? megan: i agree with all of that. the one thing that the referendum achieved was that it totally decimated all of the opposition. if there is one man to deal with in greece it is obviously alexis tsipras. externally, his reputation is damaged or really gambling with
the country's's future. charlie: thank you both. what is the next question? first europe, and then globally. ian: is merkel going to come to the table? she is absolutely the one vulnerable here. nobody wants this to fall apart on their watch. tsipras is the hero here, not just for the greeks. he is getting a lot of respect from a lot of people who thought he could not play cards here. he has got a horrible hand. he is playing well as he possibly can. he is doing well right now. merkel is the question. we have to see what she will do and in a 48 hours. it will be interesting to watch. globally, we talk a lot more than the american press does. china is what we need to watch. we can talk about the middle east and greece and iran and
iraq and isis, but the fact is while we do our -- we discuss those things they're becoming the largest economy in the world with strong leadership that is consolidated at the top end a very proud nation that feels quite confident in what they are a college mean and what they are bringing to the world. charlie: russia and china and other same time whether there will be a concerted effort against isis. ian: i don't know there will be a corrugated effort because nine or -- neither of them want to put a significant capital into the middle east at this point. charlie: you do not think the russians have any desire to be part, or the iranians, part of the anti-isis? ian: i think a coalition that is anti-isis automatically involves things like the saudi's and the middle east. i do not think you can get the iranians and the saudi's together. have a hand in something they see as being fraught with risk. it will not give a lot of upside
to them. so no, i think they will stay reasonably on the sidelines. i think it is interesting in the last couple of meetings and phone calls we have had. kerry and obama and couldn't have talked a lot more broadly than just ukraine. it is because they recognized they overplayed their hand and ultimately you can have big fights with big companies and you also need them in some ways. we will have a lot more fun enemies -- frenemies. charlie: thank you all very much. ♪
charlie: the u.s. had a historic victory against japan in the women's world cup final on sunday. the highest scoring final in world cup history. the match began with the u.s. midfielder carly the game was a rematch. japan one in a penalty shoot out. this is the first world cup win for the women's team in 16 years. the u.s. is the first nation to win his third title. joining me now from seattle washington, brianna, and olympic gold medalist.
here in new york, tommy smith, a sake -- soccer analyst and joining us in progress from vancouver, canada, a sports reporter for the u.s. times and author of a book about the 19 and nine championship team called "the girls of summer." is this what we expected? it was over early. >> you could never write a script like this. if you tuned in in the last 16 minutes, the game was over. the united states, first 20 minutes against australia, unbelievable problems. after that, the united states just started to improve. and when their coach lied up front and told them to become an attacker there was no problem for the united states. before that, she was a defender. when she set her loose and said,
go score goals, she scored goals and really rounded it out. charlie: how good is the team? >> very good. they have got it going altogether. that came from midfield. perfectly. it was unbelievable she had the recognition. it was off the line and that she could actually beat her. you felt bad but obviously she did not so bad for her at all. charlie: you have written a book about women's soccer. how does this team measure up to all the women's teams that you have seen? x it is difficult to compare charlie. this team is probably the best defense of team the night states as ever had. also, since the u.s. team won
the women's world cup in 1999, the game has an -- evolved tremendously. it is a faster game. i would say the competition is probably at a higher level than it was for previous american victories. charlie: what would you say about carly? >> early in her career, she struggled with fitness but began working with a personal coach and trains all the time. she has become one of the best big-game players in the history of soccer. she scored the winning goain the 2008 olympics. she said she dreamed of scoring four goals in the final. she almost did. a player who works on confidence, as long as she feels assured, she is one of the best players in the world. charlie: this is by the american
coach who said carli lloyd was a challenge to coach and when she felt we had faith in her, she could be one of the best players. it clearly made her a better player. >> in this tournament, she was in a defensive role and longing to push forward and attack. she essentially said at one point to reporters that we have to start taking chances. she has a good relationship with the coach. they spoke with each other and she said, do not worry, we will get you going. by necessity and her tactical nimbleness, i think jill figured out carly was needed in a more for -- attacking role. it proved to be the difference. charlie: what impressed you
beyond carly and the team? >> this could be a very controversial team. we were talking and everyone was having -- she was not doing the right thing. the u.s. team were not finishing their opportunities. it became a big deal p or she could not score. there was a lot of controversy. she had her head and had everybody together and eventually, everybody got onto the wrong page. look like everything would blow up at the same time. admittedly, even at the most arduous fan will tell you, they got a couple of calls from the referee against germany. but that is soccer. you make your own luck. if you can make your own luck and push on from there, good for you. the fact that this team stayed together and did not explode into controversy, there were
people saying she did not have -- charlie: who got credit for that? >> she is not getting credit for it yet. the coach will definitely get credit for it, that she could handle all of those things going on. we will probably hear a lot of other things now that the tournament was over. she is not getting a whole lot of credit, alex morgan p or she is coming back from a long-term injury. i thought she played really well. she showed herself up really well. charlie: what is the difference from men's soccer? is it athleticism? i do not think so. is it strength perhaps what else? >> decades of being allowed to play. the women were not allowed to play the world cup until 1991. the men have decades of advanced opportunity to play. the women, i think, have really appealed to many spectators with
the team aspect of the game. maybe because it unfolds slightly slower. it may be better or easier to watch for many people. there is no difference in determination and, you know longing for victory, and teamwork. as indistinguishable. briana: i think it will be amazing. so many people were able to watch the victory the u.s. had yesterday. not only do you have social media, but you also have a real feeling of knowing these players and i think people really appreciated that here they felt like they knew alex morgan and lauren holiday. they knew abby. they figured out that they got to know them and they felt like
friends and everybody got involved. i think with that addition of social media into the game now, you will see a real x financial growth can we had exponential growth in 99 after our great victory. i think today, you will see that as well going in. it will not be for a few years from now and maybe five years from now that you see the difference in the growth of the game, but i think it is coming. i really feel it is a very meaningful and very powerful victory that the usa was able to have an really reestablished themselves as the best team in the world, especially at this time. charlie: talk about hope and her performance. briana: hope had a fantastic game against australia. they had a young team and fantastic runs. they were very much in control of that game. it would seem they are a little flat and floundering and hope stepped up and that is what the goalkeeper has to do. there will be a time when the
team is really flat. hope solo stepped up and did her part. she had a fantastic first half and that was able to give the usa some time to really get their bearings about them. in the second half, they came out and made a lot of different adjustments at halftime. a completely different team in the second half. for the rest of the tournament, you do not see hope doing a lot after that. a lot of good communication with her defense. her facing on the backline was fantastic. as a unit, the five of them, they had a fantastic world cup and one of the best defenses i've ever seen to be completely honest with you. yesterday, just carried on in. a four goal spot in the first 15 minutes with the wonders of carli lloyd, and they basically held onto it. they really should be commended and appreciated, especially becky. charlie: what did you think of the japanese coach and the calls
she made? briana: the japanese coach made interesting substitutions p or i felt in the games before i had seen, i was a little bit puzzled by some of the substitutions they were making. some players playing very well of each other she would make substitutions at odd times, i felt it i feel the japan team was a little bit off coming into the final as they barely beat england in an extra time goal. i felt england was really dominating the game. japan kind of backed into the final, whereas the usa, they came storming into it. as soon as they got the big win against germany, i really think that they felt it was destiny for them to win. fisher came out quickly and put it away in the first 15 minutes. charlie: you sense the same thing, of destiny? >> yes there really seemed to be. there was a confidence, i think,
that began building after the victory over china in the quarterfinals. one carli lloyd started to go forward and scoring and providing some of her reliable attack, i think the confidence built, the players were very assured before the final. not arrogantly so, but they were assured they would win. i'm not sure anyone realized they would score three or four goals in 16 minutes, but they were pretty confident. charlie: writing a book about this world cup, what is the narrative? >> the women's game is growing to a point where they are criticizing the coaches lineups and formations. it shows that people are taking the game seriously, that there is a more sophisticated viewing of the game. also, i think the other narrative is that the rest of the world is catching up to the united states, even though the united states one.
you saw in this tournament columbia beats franch, the third right team in the world. england reached the semifinals. while women still unfortunately are not treated equally, women's football is gaining more resources around the world and the game continues to grow. i think that is probably the most hopeful thing, that people are in greater numbers. charlie: you think the same thing, tommy, the idea that this win will accent the appeal of soccer in america? tommy: yes. that will give more sponsors. you will get more bang for the buck for the women's team. the u.s. only has $2 million from fifa for winning the world cup but the men's team got $34 million. there is a lot of things going on here. in england, there were 12 main people who watched the game the other night. that is honest and credible
because the game was played live at 12:00 midnight from 12:00 to 2:00. 12 million. that is incredible because in england, there was absolutely no interest, practically, in the women's game. the women's game has grown in leaps and bounds in this victory here, the only thing that could have been better was if the u.s. had beaten england on july 4. that would have been the best. i would have been the kicker. charlie: two days. the idea in america where men's soccer football is not as appreciated as it is around the world around the world, is women's soccer appreciated less than here? comment: it is much less. very few countries except germany probably australia and france, that have any interest. it is started to catch on. it is changing. we live in a different world and
everything is changing now. there were teams here. the irish coast was here. these were teams that were never heard of before. women's soccer is starting to get a foothold because men's soccer just heaps rolling and rolling and rolling. it is a juggernaut. women sought -- women's soccer is starting to catch up a bit. briana: i am confident women's soccer will continue to grow. the mere fact that there are 2014's in the german is a good sign for me. i keep going back to 1999, where we had a lot of euro teams. ever since the 1999 world cup win, the effect that had basically made other federations more money and more resources into their teams, thinking hey they could create something to the -- that the u.s. created, or give somebody else opportunity. and maybe we have more here than we realized with women's programs are now that the team
has one such an amazing world cup and the fan base has been fantastic, and high numbers for fox with ratings, i think you have an opportunity here to grow the game of women's soccer organically. it will be a bigger opportunity for fifa if they choose to pour more money into it as well. charlie: you are writing a book about this team? >> i am not. but i echo what they have said to a point. still in latin cultures women are often not encouraged to play soccer. they are considered unfeminine and in africa, women in many places are actively discouraged from playing soccer. there needs to be cultural changes and there needs to be from fifa, i think much more encouragement. the president of fifa, sepp blatter, his take idea was to
have women wear tighter shorts. he forced them to play this term and on artificial turf, where men have always been able to plan grass. fifa needs to be far more serious about encouraging women's soccer. as in all other sports, women just need the opportunity and they have -- if given the opportunity, they show what they can do. charlie: the reason women have done well in america is because at some point, at whatever decade it was, we started at opening opportunities for young girls to play soccer? is that what happened? >> he opportunity became available and that is what happened all over the world. there are many parts of the world where the girls and women do not have an opportunity to even explore whether they want to play soccer or not hear it i feel in the united states, we have always had that it with the advent of title ix, that was a huge point that went through the now give us the opportunity.
i'm a product of title ix, even that i was given an opportunity to put just didn't soccer or basketball over whatever it was and i chose soccer. i think that is what helps grow any sport around the country especially around the world. opportunity has to be available. charlie: why soccer? briana: i chose a lot of sports. basketball, tennis, softball in high school. i enjoyed a lot of different sports and had a lot more opportunity, like we just said to play soccer at a higher level in college. so that is what i went with. finally, i was told i was good enough to play on the national team by my college team coach at the time or enough, that is where i ended up 15 years later. absolutely outstanding opportunity, once again, for me that may not have been there a few years before that. title ix had not come through, if the opportunity had not been available, i would not be talking to you right now. it is now the time for other