Posted on 06/24/2010 1:22:08 AM PDT by Chet 99
By John Houder Columnist
Published: Thursday, June 17, 2010 at 6:01 a.m.
Last Modified: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 at 2:12 p.m.
The United States is a nation of differences. We all live together under one flag, but we're divided by geography, religion and socio-economic class. We disagree on trivial subjects like politics and important ones like whether or not the series finale of “Lost” was a complete disappointment. (It was.)
The only thing that transcends those boundaries and ties us together as a country is our mutual understanding that soccer is a pretty stupid game.
Everyone, from the richest Wall Street CEO to the poorest, bus-station hobo, will agree that soccer is an intensely boring sport where players are more likely to get hurt writhing around on the “pitch” in fake agony than they are while actually playing the game.
Where is the excitement in a 90-minute match that ends in a score of 1-0 or, often enough, 0-0? How many games can you watch before you lose all hope that something interesting will ever happen? Why don't they just pick up the ball or punch each other like in a real sport?
If we don't hate soccer, we certainly approach it with the same detached ambivalence as we do the metric system or photographs of other people's vacations. We understand that it's important or interesting to someone else, but we just don't have the time or energy to care about it ourselves.
(Excerpt) Read more at gainesville.com ...
>> Welcome to the Free Republic. <<
... troll!
(HHOK!)
With an attitude like that, you’re going to be a terror on the driveway and a major annoyance on the parkway!
Really nice call, thanks! And yes, Germany vs Ghana was not good to watch, whereas the U.S. team is a joy to behold, whomever they play against. Soccer has mainly these two types of play on offer currently: the dreaded Italian-style ‘catenaccio’ (= ‘concrete football’), only aimed at defending and result; and the joyful attacks of the U.S. (which always was Holland’s forte too, but they opted for safety up until now).
I really hope that the U.S. will get very far, and demonstrate that delightful powerplay and a good result can go hand in hand after all.
Soccer is a terrific game for kids to play. It is intensely aerobic and requires lots of teamwork along with individual finesse. It does not require a massive physique like American football, or freakish height like basketball. But it is boring to watch. There is too little shooting and scoring. Compare soccer to another sport played by teams on a grass field with 2 goals: lacrosse. The games are basically similar in principle, but lacrosse is the most exciting spectator sport I have ever seen. It also has all the aerobic benefits of soccer and all the finesse (e.g. precision passing and timing) of football or basketball.
>>>> “Each to his own, but it really is foolish to put down one sport to enhance another.” <<<<
>>Absolutely 100% agree. That’s why we have hundreds of sports to enjoy, and many channels to surf. <<
But that’s exactly why so many Americans HATE soccer*... because it’s used by the multi-culturalists and socialists to put down America as isolated, jingoistic and uncultured... as if those soccer hooligans who rain stones down on “enemy” teams and crush each other to death are so much more enlightened.
(*Well, that and because it really is a stupid sport.)
>>>> “Each to his own, but it really is foolish to put down one sport to enhance another.” <<<<
>>Absolutely 100% agree. That’s why we have hundreds of sports to enjoy, and many channels to surf. <<
But that’s exactly why so many Americans HATE soccer*... because it’s used by the multi-culturalists and socialists to put down America as isolated, jingoistic and uncultured... as if those soccer hooligans who rain stones down on “enemy” teams and crush each other to death are so much more enlightened.
(*Well, that and because it really is a stupid sport.)
“The only thing that transcends those boundaries and ties us together as a country is our mutual understanding that soccer is a pretty stupid game.”
This may have been true twenty years ago. It’s not the case now at all.
>>>> “The only thing that transcends those boundaries and ties us together as a country is our mutual understanding that soccer is a pretty stupid game.” <<<<
>> This may have been true twenty years ago. It’s not the case now at all. <<
... And look where our country has gone.
>>>> “The only thing that transcends those boundaries and ties us together as a country is our mutual understanding that soccer is a pretty stupid game.” <<<<
>> This may have been true twenty years ago. It’s not the case now at all. <<
... And look where our country has gone.
I never even saw soccer until I entered a prep school in the 9th grade. We were given our choice for gym class; football or soccer. I was too tall and skinny for football, so I chose soccer, even though I’d never seen anyone play it. We got to watch the school’s team and decide which position we wanted to learn. I saw everyone running around non-stop like a bunch of maniacs, so I chose to be a goalie. I can be a fun game to play, but it’s terminally boring to sit and watch.
BS. First of all, the US is becoming more and more a force in world soccer, both at the youth level and the professional level. American women have won the world championship and the Olympic championship several times. Viewership for the World Cup in the US has doubled since 2006. We are far from being isolated.
Can you cite any sources for the use of soccer "by the multi-culturalists and socialists to put down America as isolated, jingoistic and uncultured..?" I certainly can point to the article in this tread along with many others by American sportswriters who denigrate soccer and the people who enjoy it.
And your silly statmement, "Well, that and because it really is a stupid sport," reflects the level of discourse you engage in. Billions of people enjoy the game around the globe, including the US. It is by far the world's most popular sport, so you are in a distinct minority. You are entitled to your own opinion, not your own facts.
It is going to be a great two weeks of the World Cup. So, you’re ready to hop on the bandwagon? Get in line. Plenty of people are already aboard, at least in soccer-literate San Diego. According to Nielsen TV ratings, more people in San Diego County watched the U.S.-England game June 12 than any of the first six Lakers-Celtics games of the NBA Finals.
The World Cup final on 11 July will vie with the 2002 World Cup final for the record of being the second most-watched live televised event in human history – behind the 2008 Olympic Games opening ceremony – according to Kevin Alavy, a leading authority on global TV viewing patterns in sport.
The Beijing Olympics opening ceremony was the most-watched event in human history, with an average TV audience of 593m and a reach of 984m. With “out of home” viewing, it became the first “genuine 1bn” spectator event. The previous most-watched event was the 2002 World Cup final between Germany and Brazil in Yokohama, Japan, which drew an average audience of 348m people. (Reach wasn’t measured at that time).
Alavy forecasts that 2010 World Cup matches will see average audiences of around 125m people per match; or in terms that will shock most American TV viewers, 64 Super Bowl-size TV audiences inside a single month. “No other media property delivers the same spikes in audience delivery, day-after-day, sustained over a month as the Fifa World Cup,” says Alavy. “In that sense, the World Cup can be described as the largest shared experience in the world – with all the communications implications and benefits that brings.”As for the final, Alavy thinks the average audience will probably be between 330m and 350m people, perhaps higher. “But there can be a significantly different figure, depending who is in that final, of course,” he says.
Will the dreaded Italian style - ‘catenaccio’ - be on display this afternoon, or will the Azurri have to abandon that and play more wide open as they need a win?
Dude. This is snarky comedy thread. Lighten up, Francis.
And by the way, I’m reeeeeally impressed that the soccer coverage is so popular in San Diego County, right along the Mexican border. But, umm, thanks for demonstrating precisely the attitude I *HAD* been joking about. (”It’s by far the world’s most popular sport, so you’re not ALLOWED to think it’s stupid!”)
This is one of the reasons why there are so many soccer haters. Here's how the typical conversation goes:
Two men are watching a soccer match on television
Soccer hater: You know, I really don't find soccer all that interesting.
Soccer lover: It's only because you're too stupid to understand it. Poor you. Anyone who truly *understands* the game will love it. Because you do not love it, you do not understand it. Sad, really. I, on the other hand, am gifted with the understanding of soccer, and thus I love it.
Soccer hater: F off.
I disagree with that premise.
This American likes a sport where there is definitive control of the ball. My interest in soccer is about the same I have for hockey. Very limited. In both sports ( soccer and hockey) there is a lot of movement and there is a lot of continuous turnover of the ball( puck.)
In American football or, for that matter, basketball, excessive turnovers are called sloppy play. In soccer, it is part of the game. Regardless of scoring I find the relentless turnovers boring. I believe a majority of sports interested American fans prefer sports where there is definitive control of the ball. In football and basketball it is the offense. In baseball it is the defense. In soccer it is a group of players seemingly exchanging, over and over and over and over and over, the ball until a lucky shot is made.
Nothing ethnocentric or jingoistic about it. Americans have different tastes and soccer is unsatisfying.
I said you were entitled to your own opinion, not your own facts. I could give a sh*t whether you like or hate soccer. Just don’t try to impose your pop psychology on why some Americans “HATE” soccer.<?p>
I don’t doubt that they’ll play ‘locked up’ again. Italians are opportunists by nature; the go for that one goal necessary, at the cost of the viewer’s pleasure. It is dreadful that Brasil also has adopted this style more or less - their coach Dunga got so much flak for that in his homeland, but as for results, it worked up until now.
Paradoxically, one reason for this is that modern soccer is enormously fast compared to only 20 years ago, and the players are real athletes. This leads to increased fears for letting the adversary come ‘into it’s play’, and so both teams hold each other captive on the midfield.
And that’s why my point is: if soccer will have to save itself from another period of boredom, it will have to adopt the Americans’ style. Go for it, totally, and with all that you have (see Lance Armstrong, Greg LeMond). Goals against are no problem, only make sure that you score one more than your enemy.
The third world popularity of Soccer is due in part to it being a game that only needs a ball, goal and place to play.
De gustibus non est disputandum
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.