If you're like me, you immediately began to plan an "illness" when it was announced that the USA-Mexico World Cup qualifier set for August 12th would go off at 3pm CT (4pm ET). I've got my excuse ready, and I'm set to be home in plenty of time to get comfortable for the afternoon kickoff.

The only question that remained was, what channel would I be watching it on?

The answer came today courtesy of Steven Goff, who reports that Telemundo is holding on to their the English-language rights for the game and will be showing the match on mun2, a sister channel that typically aimed at a younger Latino demographic (and which regularly broadcasts in English).

This is both good and bad news, all at once. The good news: If you have mun2, you'll be treated to a Delacamera & Harkes-free match, a rarity when the US plays a meaningful match. The bad news: If you don't get mun2 (and I'll still trying to figure out if I do), you'll be forced to watch the game on the main Spanish-language outlet of Telemundo. There are worse things to be forced to do of course, and I'm one that generally doesn't need commentary to keep my aware of the game. On occasion though, there are moments in a match that need the clarification of the broadcasters; often this is due to cameras missing crucial action or switching away before it was clear what exactly occurred.

In the end, it doesn't really matter. I'll be watching wherever I can, and while not having English commentators may make it slightly more difficult to follow the action, I'll just be glad to see it.

One does have to wonder if this will mitigate the impact of the match, because although it's set to take place during working hours, I have the sense that new found USMNT fans and those intrigued by last month's Confed Cup run were looking forward to watching the game. Will the non-die hard English-only speakers be turned off if they can't find the game in their language on their televisions?

What about you guys? Any concern over the English outlet for the match? Happy not to have to listen to Harkes and Delacamera if you do in fact have mun2?

Tuesdays are just terrible, terrible days. I would much rather be here, updating and commentating on the news of the day with you good people, but that's not what my job pays me to do.

Hence, this little afternoon shout is all about the work of others, because I don't want you to think I'm neglecting you.

Go read the excerpt released for Grant Wahl's upcoming book on David Beckham. It's intriguing stuff. I hope to have both a commentary on the except selection tonight and a commentary on the full version in the near future. There's plenty to talk about with MLS, the Galaxy, and all of the relevant parties. It should make for an interesting summer in LA (and leads me to a conclusion on Donovan, but that's for later).

There's word the CONCACAF is pulling their clubs out of the Copa Sudamericana. I haven't really had a chance to think about what this means, but it's obviously a move by Blazer & Co. to give Mexican clubs more incentive to care about the CONCACAF Champions League. The note about the confederation meeting in November to review CONCACAF (meaning Mexico because they're the only ones involved right now) clubs' participating in the Copa Libertadores is very interesting.

Goff has updated the TV numbers for the Confed Cup final, and they're just a little different than what we heard yesterday. I still don't think it completely represents the audience that watched that game. Here's a Seattle Times Sounders blog post on how those numbers stack up in American soccer TV history.

One last note before I go: Am I the only one that wonders why we haven't heard even one Donovan transfer rumor? Either MLS has the guy on complete lockdown and the whole world knows it, or the clubs interested have managed to keep it quiet. Maybe there's just no interest.

The man that would know, Steven Goff of the Washington Post, is reporting that there may be a new player in the DC United stadium saga. United has already struck out in Prince George's County, and both Montgomery County, Maryland and Loudoun County, Virginia have been mentioned as possible locations; because of all of those exes dotting the DC metropolitan area map (colloquially known as the "DMV" these days), Goff speculates that perhaps the new suitor is Fairfax County, Virginia.

If that's true, and there's nothing in Goff's post to back it up, it's just his best guess, then I would be completely and utterly stunned.

Back when I did my United stadium location round up, I discounted Fairfax County as a potential home for the club. I based this on several factors, not the least of which is a county government most view as ill-suited to the passage of a major stadium construction bill.

But if Goff is right, and if Fairfax County is indeed interested in becoming the permanent home of DC United, then we can look at the development in a few different ways. Part of the good/bad designation of this news is dependent on where in Fairfax County the stadium would be located. For those unfamiliar with the geography of the area, the DC metro is broken down most simply by the designations "inside the beltway" and "outside the beltway". Anything inside the beltway is going to be closer to the city proper, but much more accessible by public transportation, and more than likely be characterized by an urban setting. Any location outside the beltway tends to be more suburban and less easily accessible to those not driving, though this rule is far from hard and fast.

Fairfax County straddles the beltway, and spans the spectrum of "urban" and "suburban". If the DC United stadium was to be located inside or directly adjacent to the beltway, than it would be an incredible boon to the club. But if Fairfax County is eying land farther west on which to build, the same issues that plague potential sits in Loudoun and Montgomery counties may come to bear.

Again, it's only speculation on the part of Goff, and nothing has been officially announced by the team or the county. Even if the site is located in the western part of Fairfax, it's probably preferable to the other possibilities mentioned to this point; DC's subway system, the Metro, is planning massive expansion farther west, and that eventually benefit the team in their new facility.

Fairfax County is an odd mix of the well-off and the not-so-rich, with a broad range of ethnic groups inhabiting the area. The county has a significant Latino population, from which the club already draws a substantial portion of their fan base; add to that the "soccer mom" crowd that infects the more affluent areas of the county, and it makes sense for United to be located there.

I am just a little concerned about what part of the county might be targeted, but until we find out whether or not Goff's supposition is correct, it remains a moot point.

Just as an aside, it was interesting to see in Goff's post that the city remains in play, as the Poplar Point project remains on the table.

If you come by here on a regular basis, it's probably safe to assume that you check Steven Goff's soccer blog at the Washington Post. Just in case you don't, however, I wanted to pass along a link to Goff's entry today on the United march:

Forward, March! (for a Stadium)

More interesting than Goff's mention of the march (which should help the effort) is the reaction of the readers. There seem to be plenty of people missing the point, people that apparently would roll over and concede defeat when faced with a struggle.

The march is intended to effect results; but it would be ridiculous to think that United fans wouldn't be trying even if it appeared that it would have no effect. From meeting some of the guys involved, I can't imagine that they wouldn't have done something like this even if a relocation agreement had already been reached. These guys love their club, and they're going to try anything to make sure it doesn't go anyway.

And once again, we're treated to the tired "If the owners would step up and build it themselves, none of this would be happening" crap. Anyone who doesn't understand that it's just a tad more complicated than that shouldn't be commenting.

No mention of the United Movement idea there (not that I expected there would be), though I'm hoping we can still get things moving on that. If anyone out there would like to log in to washpost.com and mention it (no link necessary, and I doubt you could post one anyway), I won't stop you...