Posted on 03/11/2009 8:56:05 AM PDT by AreaMan
How Soccer is Ruining America: A Jeremiad
Soccer is running America into the ground, and there is very little anyone can do about it. Social critics have long observed that we live in a therapeutic society that treats young people as if they can do no wrong. Every kid is a winner, and nobody is ever left behind, no matter how many times they watch the ball going the other way. Whether the dumbing down of America or soccer came first is hard to say, but soccer is clearly an important means by which American energy, drive, and competitiveness is being undermined to the point of no return.
What other game, to put it bluntly, is so boring to watch? (Bowling and golf come to mind, but the sound of crashing pins and the sight of the well-attired strolling on perfectly kept greens are at least inherently pleasurable activities.) The linear, two-dimensional action of soccer is like the rocking of a boat but without any storm and while the boat has not even left the dock. Think of two posses pursuing their prey in opposite directions without any bullets in their guns. Soccer is the fluoridation of the American sporting scene.
For those who think I jest, let me put forth four points, which is more points than most fans will see in a week of games—and more points than most soccer players have scored since their pee-wee days.
1) Any sport that limits you to using your feet, with the occasional bang of the head, has something very wrong with it. Indeed, soccer is a liberal’s dream of tragedy: It creates an egalitarian playing field by rigorously enforcing a uniform disability. Anthropologists commonly define man according to his use of hands. We have the thumb, an opposable digit that God gave us to distinguish us from animals that walk on all fours. The thumb lets us do things like throw baseballs and fold our hands in prayer. We can even talk with our hands. Have you ever seen a deaf person trying to talk with their feet? When you are really angry and acting like an animal, you kick out with your feet. Only fools punch a wall with their hands. The Iraqi who threw his shoes at President Bush was following his primordial instincts. Showing someone your feet, or sticking your shoes in someone’s face, is the ultimate sign of disrespect. Do kids ever say, “Trick or Treat, smell my hands”? Did Jesus wash his disciples’ hands at the Last Supper? No, hands are divine (they are one of the body parts most frequently attributed to God), while feet are in need of redemption. In all the portraits of God’s wrath, never once is he pictured as wanting to step on us or kick us; he does not stoop that low.
2) Sporting should be about breaking kids down before you start building them up. Take baseball, for example. When I was a kid, baseball was the most popular sport precisely because it was so demanding. Even its language was intimidating, with bases, bats, strikes, and outs. Striding up to the plate gave each of us a chance to act like we were starring in a Western movie, and tapping the bat to the plate gave us our first experience with inventing self-indulgent personal rituals. The boy chosen to be the pitcher was inevitably the first kid on the team to reach puberty, and he threw a hard ball right at you.
Thus, you had to face the fear of disfigurement as well as the statistical probability of striking out. The spectacle of your failure was so public that it was like having all of your friends invited to your home to watch your dad forcing you to eat your vegetables. We also spent a lot of time in the outfield chanting, “Hey batter batter!” as if we were Buddhist monks on steroids. Our chanting was compensatory behavior, a way of making the time go by, which is surely why at soccer games today it is the parents who do all of the yelling.
3) Everyone knows that soccer is a foreign invasion, but few people know exactly what is wrong with that. More than having to do with its origin, soccer is a European sport because it is all about death and despair. Americans would never invent a sport where the better you get the less you score. Even the way most games end, in sudden death, suggests something of an old-fashioned duel. How could anyone enjoy a game where so much energy results in so little advantage, and which typically ends with a penalty kick out, as if it is the audience that needs to be put out of its misery. Shootouts are such an anticlimax to the game and are so unpredictable that the teams might as well flip a coin to see who wins—indeed, they might as well flip the coin before the game, and not play at all.
4) And then there is the question of gender. I know my daughter will kick me when she reads this, but soccer is a game for girls. Girls are too smart to waste an entire day playing baseball, and they do not have the bloodlust for football. Soccer penalizes shoving and burns countless calories, and the margins of victory are almost always too narrow to afford any gloating. As a display of nearly death-defying stamina, soccer mimics the paradigmatic feminine experience of childbirth more than the masculine business of destroying your opponent with insurmountable power.
Let me conclude on a note of despair appropriate to my topic. There is no way to run away from soccer, if only because it is a sport all about running. It is as relentless as it is easy, and it is as tiring to play as it is tedious to watch. The real tragedy is that soccer is a foreign invasion, but it is not a plot to overthrow America. For those inclined toward paranoia, it would be easy to blame soccer’s success on the political left, which, after all, worked for years to bring European decadence and despair to America. The left tried to make existentialism, Marxism, post-structuralism, and deconstructionism fashionable in order to weaken the clarity, pragmatism, and drive of American culture. What the left could not accomplish through these intellectual fads, one might suspect, they are trying to accomplish through sport.
Yet this suspicion would be mistaken. Soccer is of foreign origin, that is certainly true, but its promotion and implementation are thoroughly domestic. Soccer is a self-inflicted wound. Americans have nobody to blame but themselves. Conservative suburban families, the backbone of America, have turned to soccer in droves. Baseball is too intimidating, football too brutal, and basketball takes too much time to develop the required skills. American parents in the past several decades are overworked and exhausted, but their children are overweight and neglected. Soccer is the perfect antidote to television and video games. It forces kids to run and run, and everyone can play their role, no matter how minor or irrelevant to the game. Soccer and relevision are the peanut butter and jelly of parenting.
I should know. I am an overworked teacher, with books to read and books to write, and before I put in a video for the kids to watch while I work in the evenings, they need to have spent some of their energy. Otherwise, they want to play with me! Last year all three of my kids were on three different soccer teams at the same time. My daughter is on a traveling team, and she is quite good. I had to sign a form that said, among other things, I would not do anything embarrassing to her or the team during the game. I told the coach I could not sign it. She was perplexed and worried. “Why not,” she asked? “Are you one of those parents who yells at their kids? “Not at all,” I replied, “I read books on the sidelines during the game, and this embarrasses my daughter to no end.” That is my one way of protesting the rise of this pitiful sport. Nonetheless, I must say that my kids and I come home from a soccer game a very happy family.
Stephen H. Webb is a professor of religion and philosophy at Wabash College. His recent books include American Providence and Taking Religion to School.
...my daughter plays field hockey... a sport that requires you be a stone cold b*tch to win!..... no wimps or whiners in her sport.
Undefined outcomes represent the antithesis of effective life management. Goals are either achieved or they are not yet achieved. One doesn’t walk away from an unresolved contest merely because an arbitrary time limit expired.
Clock-ruled games which permit ties are not positive metaphors for life.
Merely contradicting the detractors isn’t a defence against the criticism.
Soccer in the U.S. was championed primarily by a specific demographic, and it’s not out of bounds to comment on the implications of that.
You are stating an opinion as fact, on a thread where (some) FReepers are championing soccer in the U.S.
A river in Egypt!
All you need to do is look at how the NHL has completely hosed their points system to get rid of ties to see why there’s nothing wrong with a tie. If nobody can manage to win in regulation plus a little the game probably sucked anyway, call it a tie and everybody go home.
Ah...good one..I didn’t get it. Must be all those years of public school education.
There are outliers in every pool. Some Freepers no doubt champion tiddly-winks, and water polo.
The genesis of American soccer in the 1970s was pretty straightforward to anyone who was there: suburban, europhilic, Volvo driving types. That doesn’t make them the authorities on what association football in the U.S. is about, it just left a legacy and stereotype of “American soccer” which will take some time and new blood to surmount.
Why did the NHL “hose” their points system if there’s nothing wrong with a tie?
A tie represents a lack of commitment to a definite outcome, one way or another.
???? I mean it's not as if soccer leagues don't determine champions. If every team was declared champion I might see your "metaphor." I know if a team in the EPL that is in the running for the title, or one of the top four spots (and with it a spot in the Champions League), a tie result can be devastating, since it essentially costs them two points. And that is one thing about the Premiereship, it's strictly what you do in the regular season, there are no playoffs, with a clean slate for every team that gets in. You are strictly awarded for what you accomplish over the long-haul, rather than for being the team that is hot at the right time.
LOL--much like there are people who look at the shallow end and surmise the entire pool is "safe."
But why not play every game to a decision? The ties only have meaning in the context of a meta-game which does NOT permit ties.
So why not pursue that logic all the way?
Russia covers more time zones than the US but effectively shuts down for Russian World Cup games, India has twice the population of the US and will do the same for Test Cricket.
It's a matter of national culture. America has Football and Baseball ingrained in their Culture, other countries have other sports.
America does the same thing with Baseball as it does with football, As you say, it's an international sport, but holds a domestic competition to unilaterally declare their own "World Champions".
And you can't even argue that American Baseball teams are the best in the world, I note The World Baseball Classic is being decided between the DUTCH(!) and Puerto Rico....LOL!
What the NHL didn’t like about ties was the thought that some teams would go into defensive shells towards the end of regulation and through the 5 minute over time to protect the 1 point you got for a tie. So you’d get a game that was close and exciting all the way up until the last 10 minutes and then nobody would try to score anymore because that would be “risky” and might give the other team an opportunity, then you’d lose the 1 point (2 points for a win, 1 for a tie, none for a loss).
So to “fix” that the league changes the system so if teams finish regulation tied they both got 1 point and then the eventual winner would get 1 more. So now we’ve got an idiot system where they get 2 points for a win, 0 for a loss in regulation and 1 for a loss that takes longer than regulation (overtime loss). It’s stupid, they artificially added points to the system, and they didn’t even fix the problem, teams STILL tank the last 5 minutes to protect the 1 point, and skate slow in OT waiting for the shootout. The only good part about the current system is the shootouts are kind of fun, but they’re preceded by 10 minutes of boring risk averse hockey.
Russia and India don’t have a lot to hang their hat on. We have a history of winning wars, saving the world for democracy, and technical and social innovation to be proud of.
It is a matter of culture, but not the way you think. We have a much wider culture than any sport can ever encompass. There’s just no way we’ll shut down for any sport ever. Even for the Super Bowl, most watched event in America, we march on.
They control the league, they control the champion, they can call them whatever they want. And if that bothers people, especially people from other countries GOOD. We declare whatever WORLD CHAMPIONS we want. Football, baseball, ANYTHING. Even sports we don’t like. Because we’re America and we get to do that. WORLD CHAMPIONS. And the more it bothers you the more WORLD CHAMPIONS we’ll declare.
Any metagame which privileges a tie at the end of regulation over the attempt to gain a clear decision in that time is going to see more ties at the end of regulation than a system which awards points only for a clear decision, regardless of when that decision is reached.
It would be better if the teams merely played to a decision: 1 point for a win, none for a loss.
Ties are a clear decision. Time ran out, the teams were tied, that’s clear. Would the world really have been better served to have the Bengals and Eagles keep playing one of the most painfully boring NFL games of the year just to make one of them a “winner”? No. They both stank that day, neither of them could get it together, it was a tie, it was clearly a tie.
Tied games have relevance in league competition. the system is set up that you get 3 points for a win, 1 each for a draw (tie), 0 for a loss. In a league table, if two teams above you are playing each other in this week's fixtures, you may want the game to be draw (tied), that way they both drop two points which enables your team (if it wins) to close on both of them.
League position is determined by points accumulated, and while ties are not a great result, a point is often a valuable thing to obtain, especially if you are in the relegation zone and clawing to hang on to stay in your division.
If the bottom team in the division can go to the top team's venue and hang on to get a draw (tie) that is an achievement in itself, and it is to the great delight of the other top teams to see the leader "drop two points", especially in a game they should have won.
In knock-out Cup competition, drawn games lead to replays. The replay is at (original) visiting team's stadium. This rewards the away team with home advantage and creates additional revenues as well as prolong any grudge match sub plots. It used to be that they kept playing replays until their was a result, some games have gone to six or seven replays in the past, which in itself became a mini saga at the time.
Exactly. The NHL should do the following:
3 points for a regulation win
2 points for an overtime win
1 point for an overtime loss
0 points for a regulation loss.
Ties happen in clock-driven games when two equally matched teams are unable to determine who reaches exhaustion first, not just when two equally pitiful teams collide.
Eventually, one of the two contestants will take their eyes off the ball first, and if they had been otherwise equally matched, that’s how one knows who won.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.