# What about American culture makes us dislike soccer? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [June 13, 2006, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535 "2006-06-13T03:42:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![asterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4da419/32.png) [@asterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asterion)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2006, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/141 "2006-06-16T14:07:57Z")
I gotta say, I’d rather have indifference than [this](http://www.theonion.com/content/node/49524) come to pass. ---
**Author:** ![Mayo\_Speaks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c57346/32.png) [@Mayo\_Speaks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mayo_Speaks)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2006, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/142 "2006-06-16T16:20:14Z")
[QUOTE=chappachula] reminds me of the old saying: “Soccer is the sport of the future…and always will be” [/QUOTE] Hehe. ---
**Author:** ![Mayo\_Speaks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c57346/32.png) [@Mayo\_Speaks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mayo_Speaks)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2006, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/143 "2006-06-16T16:28:25Z")
Crap. I forgot to actually make my post. Why don’t we like soccer? We didn’t grow up with it, so we don’t understand it. I’ve watched some Ronaldinho clips on Youtube, and I don’t get what the big deal is. They look impressive, sure, but I can’t appreciate how hard it actually is. Whereas I grew up watching NCAA and NBA basketball, and I can appreciate an ankle-breaking Allen Iverson crossover or a great Ben Wallace block (even if I hate Ben Wallace). And since I didn’t grow up with soccer, I don’t understand/enjoy it now. And if/when I have kids, I won’t be able to share my (nonexistant) passion and knowledge about soccer in the same way I will be able to in regards to basketball. And since most Americans don’t like soccer, our kids won’t have a chance to learn to love it, nor will their kids, ad infinitum. Also, soccer sux! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Bongmaster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Bongmaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bongmaster)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2006, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/144 "2006-06-16T18:05:05Z")
[QUOTE=Mangosteen] Lack of scoring. I just heard about a zero-zero tie in some big game. What a waste of time! Give me a soccer game where the final score is 18 to 15 or even 32 to 25. Back and forth score after score almost like basketball. Then I’ll watch. Widen the net. I think that is all it would take. Hockey has the same problem. [/QUOTE] Totally agree, I’ve heard this many times. Low scoring can make for a boring game. I think that’s one of the reasons they recently switched balls in pro soccer which all the goal keepers are complaining about. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2006, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/145 "2006-06-16T18:33:35Z")
[QUOTE=Bongmaster] Totally agree, I’ve heard this many times. Low scoring can make for a boring game. I think that’s one of the reasons they recently switched balls in pro soccer which all the goal keepers are complaining about. [/QUOTE] Actually, i’ve read a bunch of articles on the new balls, and not one so far has suggested that they were designed to make scoring higher, unless you count the whining of the goalkeepers. In fact, most articles, like [this one](http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060601/SPORTS07/606010360/1136), simply note things like: > [@](#): > > The Cup ball doesn’t have the traditional 32 black-and-white hexagon squares. It’s mostly one color (white normally, gold for the World Cup final match), with a few black patches. > The design is supposed to make the ball sleeker and, technologically, play better. The maker [denies](http://www.smh.com.au/news/world-cup-2006/curvature-of-the-ball-a-vexing-issue/2006/06/13/1149964538209.html) any explicit attempt to make things harder for goalkeepers: > [@](#): > > In an exclusive interview with smh.com.au, Nürnberg said the custodians’ misgivings about the ball are “nothing more than a visual perception”. > > “In our high-tech football laboratory, Teamgeist proved three times better in trajectory and precision than other footballs used in top-level competition,” said Nürnberg. > > “This ball is designed to give players unrivalled accuracy. Of course, it has a spectacular action and we would like strikers to take more risks and go for goal from every possible position,” said Nürnberg. “But there is nothing in it to make anticipation difficult for goalkeepers.” > > At Germany 06, strikers are salivating at the prospect of hitting this ball, while goalkeepers dread its dip and swerve. And if it _was_ introduced to make for higher scoring, it hasn’t exactly worked. As of right now (about 2.30pm EST, June 16), there have been 22 World Cup games and a total of 55 goals, or exactly 2.5 goals per game. Looking at the statistics from the [2002 World Cup](http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport3/worldcup2002/bsp/statistics/results.stm) reveals that the first 22 games resulted in a total of 58 goals, or 2.64 goals per game. At the 22-game stage, the 2002 and 2006 World Cups had each had one runaway victory, an 8-0 victory by Germany over Saudi Arabia in 2002, and a 6-0 victory by Argentina over Serbia and Montenegro in 2006. If we remove these aberrant scores, the total goal tally for each World Cup at the 22-game stage is almost identical, 49 in 2006 against 50 in 2002. Furthermore, some of the excellent saves being made by goalkeepers in this event (did anyone see some of the saves by the Paraguayan goalie in yesterday’s game against Sweden) suggests that the goalkeepers are doing just fine, and that the new ball hasn’t really changed things very much at all. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2006, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/146 "2006-06-16T19:46:35Z")
[QUOTE=Omniscient] My biggest problem with soccer is the constant need to flop and writhe on the ground in mock pain every time a guy gets touched. It’s embarrassing and stupid, makes a game that’s already on the low end of the macho-meter totally repellent. I don’t suppose that this is the source of the problem, since we’ve hated soccer long before the mass TV coverage and possibly before the whiny flopping trend, but I can tell you it’s going to keep this guy from ever giving a crap about it. [/QUOTE] What a wonderful answer, **Omniscient**. Have you played soccer? Do you know what you’re talking about? Maybe it _is_ possible to get hurt while doing it. Really hurt, I mean, and not just whining and pretending to flop around in pain. ---
**Author:** ![Fromage\_A\_Trois](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a88e57/32.png) [@Fromage\_A\_Trois](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fromage_A_Trois)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2006, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/147 "2006-06-16T20:43:54Z")
[QUOTE=The Scrivener] But getting back to my earlier points – first, stoppage time: I’ve always felt this was an arbitrary, mysterious decison on the part of the ref, and that it can’t help but confer an unfair benefit one side or the other. He can’t be keeping any sort of precise time throughout the game’s many interruptions, or the stoppage time at the end wouldn’t be an even two or three minutes. I think the typically anal American time-&-statistics-obsessed sports fan would have a lot more respect for this aspect of the game if the ref had to keep a scrupulously accurate time throughout the game and declared stoppage times of precisely 2:29 or 4:08 or whatever. Is there any sort of referee oversight procedure where the refs must account for their stoppage-time calculations? [/QUOTE] The referee does stop his watch for incidents he believes are significant, although I’m not sure how anal they are about stopping it for the exact duration of the stoppage. And it’s only for things like injured players etc, not for the build up to a free kick. It doesn’t end up as exactly 3 minutes or whatever, either… it’s a _minimum_ of 3 added minutes. Football doesn’t finish exactly when the 90 minutes are up, the referee has to use his discretion, if an attacking play is taking place, to wait until it has been completed. Therefore, it’s not necessary to know the exact number of seconds remaining. It does sometimes give one team or other an advantage - a few years ago it seemed that Manchester United had some sort of agreement with the refs if they weren’t winning at full time for an added 4 mins or so. **mhendo** and **RickJay** have summed it up for me, so all I have to say is: you get commercials _during_ the game? Can the networks not wait 45 minutes? ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2006, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/148 "2006-06-16T21:12:47Z")
[QUOTE=Fromage A Trois] you get commercials _during_ the game? Can the networks not wait 45 minutes? [/QUOTE] Well, so far i’ve only watched games on ESPN (the cable sports network) and they don’t show commercials during either half. They have a bunch of commercials at half-time, but the coverage of the game itself is uninterrupted. Not sure if the same thing will apply for the games screened on ABC, a regular, free-to-air network. I’ll find out tomorrow when ABC screens the Czech Republic v. Ghana game, and the US v. Italy game. ---
**Author:** ![Yookeroo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yookeroo/32/323_2.png) [@Yookeroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yookeroo)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2006, 6:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/149 "2006-06-17T06:30:33Z")
[QUOTE=mhendo] Well, so far i’ve only watched games on ESPN (the cable sports network) and they don’t show commercials during either half. They have a bunch of commercials at half-time, but the coverage of the game itself is uninterrupted. Not sure if the same thing will apply for the games screened on ABC, a regular, free-to-air network. I’ll find out tomorrow when ABC screens the Czech Republic v. Ghana game, and the US v. Italy game. [/QUOTE] There won’t be commercials. U.S. networks got smart about this years ago. ---
**Author:** ![Fromage\_A\_Trois](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a88e57/32.png) [@Fromage\_A\_Trois](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fromage_A_Trois)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2006, 10:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/150 "2006-06-17T10:36:37Z")
[QUOTE=Yookeroo] There won’t be commercials. U.S. networks got smart about this years ago. [/QUOTE] Just so no one thinks I invented this, I was referring back to **Barbarian** ’s comment: [QUOTE=Barbarian] The play is constant and free flowing, but not defined at all. There is no clearly defined stop and starting point within a half, so you’ve got to watch the whole thing closely. Heck, even when the air commercials, they squeeze the game into the corner so you don’t miss anything. [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![HeelB4Zod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e19adc/32.png) [@HeelB4Zod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HeelB4Zod)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2006, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/151 "2006-06-17T16:58:47Z")
Here’s my theory. The rise in popularity of a sport in America reflects the particular cultural zeitgeist of the era. For example, from 1900 until WWII, when America was still a rural nation and full-scale urbanization had not yet taken hold, baseball’s popularity soared. Baseball is a pastoral game, set in summer, timeless. Its pace is best described as leisurely. It’s the only game I know where a spectators can carry on conversations without missing the action. The heroes of the game were mythic folk heroes whose personal flaws were swept under the rug, exactly the kind of heroes a nation which regarded itself as innocent adored. Post-WWII America also saw the rise of corporations in the U.S., and no game reflects the corporate hierarchical structure more than football. Like a corporation, the players (employees) did not work as one unit but as several departments (offensive line, skill positions, linebackers, defensive line, secondary, special teams) who all reported to different assistant coaches in charge of each “department” (middle management) who all in turn reported to the head coach (director), who reported to the general manager (president), who in turn reported to the owner (CEO). Football players - like many employees of large corporations - toil in relative anonymity. And, for a nation that had won a world war and bestrode the world like a colossus, it didn’t hurt that football was a metaphor for war (its violence is self-evident, teams march down a field and acquire territory, teams won by both by being strong in the trenches and outflanking defenders, etc.). And finally, with the rise of television, football - with its rectangular field, stoppages in play, inherent violence, and (probably most important of all) the ease with which fans could wager on the outcome - was perfect for the new medium. The 1980s and 90s were the era of the individual, and no game celebrates individual achievement like basketball. Star individual players can be neutralized in baseball (it’s relatively common to see Albert Pujols bat 0-4) or football (it was somewhat common for Walter Payton to rush for 40 yards), but it’s big news if Michael Jordan only scores 6 points in a game. Individual stars are far more marketable in basketball than any other sport, perfect in a country awash in commercialism. Furthermore, basketball is a game that appealed to oft-ignored women much more than football or baseball because: - it was easy to understand at the basic level (try explaining the rules of football and baseball to neophytes - it ain’t easy) - fans can easily see the players’ faces and players wear the least clothing of all sports (apologies if that comes off as chauvinistic) - it is the most “ballet-like” of all sports with the astonishing athleticism the players display When viewed as a reflection of societal attitudes and trends, I find soccer fascinating, though I can’t claim to know the sport as well as I know the three aforementioned. For me, it’s far more interesting observing people watch the game than the game itself. Soccer outside the U.S. seems intimately intertwined with politics. It’s intriguing how fans in the U.K. - especially the leftist intelligentsia - couch their loyalty to their teams as a gesture of solidarity with the working class neighborhoods of Manchester or Birmingham or London. I suppose America has experienced similar sports phenomena (White, working class Boston Celtics vs. Black, flashy, glitzy, glamorous L.A. Lakers; counter-cultural Ali vs. establishment Frazier; Catholic Notre Dame vs. Convict Miami; evil, elitist Duke vs. wholesome, pure UNC [OK, my bias is showing on that last one]), but I don’t think it’s near the intensity seen abroad. When I was in Europe earlier this year, I read a story about an upcoming match between two Italian clubs - Lazio and Livorno (sp?) - in which the authorities were worried about violence between fans of the two clubs. Fans of Livorno see their club as a symbol of left-wing anti-globalism and view games as an opportunity to engage in political activism while waving red Communist flags at games. Lazio fans are not averse to waving swastika flags at matches. Lazio’s star Paolo di Canio apparently got into trouble for giving a fascist salute to Lazio fans as he came out of a game. Like I said, fascinating. ---
**Author:** ![Ximenean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/aca169/32.png) [@Ximenean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ximenean)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2006, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/152 "2006-06-17T18:56:49Z")
[QUOTE=HeelB4Zod] It’s intriguing how fans in the U.K. - especially the leftist intelligentsia - couch their loyalty to their teams as a gesture of solidarity with the working class neighborhoods of Manchester or Birmingham or London. [/QUOTE] With the what now? “Leftist intelligentsia”? What the hell are you talking about? Football has become very middle class in the last twenty years, which makes sense because most of us are middle class now. The idea that people support Manchester United or Liverpool as part of some class struggle is frankly hilarious. ---
**Author:** ![asterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4da419/32.png) [@asterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asterion)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2006, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/153 "2006-06-17T20:47:27Z")
It would help if the refs weren’t complete idiots. ---
**Author:** ![Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e19adc/32.png) [@Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2006, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/154 "2006-06-17T23:10:06Z")
I’m surprised by the lack of commercials, but this is my first time watching the game in the U.S. The networks in Canada used to squeeze in commercials… ---
**Author:** ![mike1dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@mike1dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mike1dog)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2006, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/155 "2006-06-18T03:36:07Z")
First time I’ve ever seen the word ‘zeitgeist’ in a sports discussion. ---
**Author:** ![HeelB4Zod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e19adc/32.png) [@HeelB4Zod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HeelB4Zod)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/156 "2006-06-19T20:13:05Z")
[QUOTE=Usram] With the what now? “Leftist intelligentsia”? What the hell are you talking about? Football has become very middle class in the last twenty years, which makes sense because most of us are middle class now. The idea that people support Manchester United or Liverpool as part of some class struggle is frankly hilarious. [/QUOTE] Well, perhaps I misspoke (hey, I’m just another clueless American bumpkin, what do you expect?), but I don’t see why it’s ridiculous to argue that soccer and politics are intertwined. I do beg forgiveness for using the term “leftist intelligentsia”; I didn’t mean it as any kind of insult, but I do think Simon Kuper or Nick Hornby or Jimmy Burns or Eamon Dunphy or Jordi Salvador Duch or Franklin Foer might argue that there certainly are connections between particular clubs and the sociological, economic, cultural, and/or political attitudes they espouse. Besides the fans of Lazio/Livorno in Italy that I mentioned in the previous post, there are plenty of examples of supporters whose loyalties to their teams transcend simple fandom and represent some deeper meaning. Among them are: - **FC Barcelona**. Is it not plausible to argue that FC Barcelona is a stirring symbol of Catalan regional identity? Is it not reasonable to assert that the fact the team is owned by its supporters (much like how the Green Bay Packers are owned by individual shareholders) and not by some tycoon adds to a sense that the team is uniquely democratic, a symbol of a people? And, considering how the team does all it can to play up its Catalan identity, (the blue and red colors, the _senyara_ on the uniform, its fierce matches with Real Madrid - which, when Franco was in power, was one of the few acceptable and legal ways Catalans could express their group identity and distinct language), it seems at least plausible to argue that its fans see the team in terms of regional pride and a vehicle for autonomous aspirations. After all, isn’t the official motto of the squad “Barça is more than a club”? - T **he Amsterdam-based team Ajax**. Throughout its history, Ajax has prided itself for its association with the Jewish middle class and a symbol of resistance to the anti-Semitic abuse from other team’s fans, especially Feyenoord. Many of its fans go so far as to tattoo themselves with Stars of David, and chant “Jews, jews” to inspire the team. Many of Ajax’s rivals’ fans make “Ssssss” hissing sounds (referring to sending the Jews to the gas chambers) and chant all sorts of terrible anti-Jewish songs and slogans inspired by Hamas. - Speaking of Man U, if Man U doesn’t represent anything more than a really good team, then what was all that fuss about Malcolm Glazer taking control of the team about, anyway? Didn’t many Manchester United fans see the American billionaire Glazer taking over the team as a blow to the unique “Britishness” the team represents? At least a little bit? Anyway, that was my point, and I submit my apologies for expressing it poorly in my first post. ---
**Author:** ![kevegan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e68b1a/32.png) [@kevegan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kevegan)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2006, 3:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/157 "2006-06-20T03:26:14Z")
[QUOTE=Fredescu] They don’t use video replays in soccer when it would be quite easy to. In Rugby League they use a video referee only for disputed tries. It wouldn’t be hard to draw the line in Soccer at only going to a video referee when a goal is in dispute. [/QUOTE] Soccer is neanderthal compared to other sports, including the ones you mention, such as cricket and rugby. I think it’s a thin end of the wedge thing in soccer, though. Introduce it for “Did the ball cross the goal-line”, then there’d be questions about why it’s not used for going out of play; then for who had the last touch before it went out for a throw or a corner, etc. etc. Another factor that must be given consideration is betting on soccer, which is huge. Once you start tinkering with some variables, then the punters may vote with their wallets (at least for an interim period) or go and spend their cash on other sports or gaming activities. Regarding the use of video replays in rugby (this time union), in a recent match I watched on TV, a try was scored (everyone was agreed with that - it was clear to any rugby person, even though one couldn’t see the ball being grounded from the angle the player went in at, the momentum provided by team mates pushing, etc). As a result of the decision being sent up to the stands the wrong decision was given. Food for thought. ---
**Author:** ![brianjedi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3be4f8/32.png) [@brianjedi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianjedi)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2006, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/158 "2006-06-20T03:46:51Z")
[QUOTE=kevegan] Soccer is neanderthal compared to other sports, including the ones you mention, such as cricket and rugby. I think it’s a thin end of the wedge thing in soccer, though. Introduce it for “Did the ball cross the goal-line”, then there’d be questions about why it’s not used for going out of play; then for who had the last touch before it went out for a throw or a corner, etc. etc. Another factor that must be given consideration is betting on soccer, which is huge. Once you start tinkering with some variables, then the punters may vote with their wallets (at least for an interim period) or go and spend their cash on other sports or gaming activities. [/QUOTE] Possession isn’t nearly as important in European football as it is in other sports, though, because turnovers are common. Scoring, on the other hand, is rare and important enough to warrant video replay. ---
**Author:** ![mike1dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@mike1dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mike1dog)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2006, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/159 "2006-06-20T03:47:44Z")
[QUOTE=kevegan] Regarding the use of video replays in rugby (this time union), in a recent match I watched on TV, a try was scored (everyone was agreed with that - it was clear to any rugby person, even though one couldn’t see the ball being grounded from the angle the player went in at, the momentum provided by team mates pushing, etc). As a result of the decision being sent up to the stands the wrong decision was given. Food for thought. [/QUOTE] As far as video replays, in the NFL they’ve made similar bone-headed calls, and if anything they’ve created more buzz because controversy is more interesting. As always, one fans horrible decision is the others great call. Nobody has quit betting because they’re worried a video replay might make a difference in the game. ---
**Author:** ![Fredescu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/73ab20/32.png) [@Fredescu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fredescu)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2006, 5:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535/160 "2006-06-20T05:37:11Z")
> [@](#): > > Soccer is neanderthal compared to other sports, including the ones you mention, such as cricket and rugby. I think it’s a thin end of the wedge thing in soccer, though. Introduce it for “Did the ball cross the goal-line”, then there’d be questions about why it’s not used for going out of play; then for who had the last touch before it went out for a throw or a corner, etc. etc. Another factor that must be given consideration is betting on soccer, which is huge. Once you start tinkering with some variables, then the punters may vote with their wallets (at least for an interim period) or go and spend their cash on other sports or gaming activities. Betting and “thin edge of the wedge” both apply to other sports though. If we compare the most common video assisted decisions in rugby and cricket, with goals in soccer, there are some differences that might explain why soccer has been slow on the uptake. Run out attemps and tries occur far more often in their respective sports than goals do in soccer. The former two often happen multiple times in a single match. The chances of them being disputed is higher too, due to the nature of the decisions. The umpire judging a [run out](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Run_out) has to tell whether the bails were removed prior to the bat sliding over the crease or not. This is a split second decision and if it’s close can be very hard to tell at full speed with the naked eye. The referree judging a try in rugby has multiple decisions to make regarding the play leading up to the try, and whether or not the ball was grounded cleanly and in one movement, all of which is often heavily obstructed by other players. It is not uncommon to see the video ref consider four or five different angles and parts of the play before making a decision. In soccer, usually either the goal is in the back of the net or it isn’t. Disputed goals happen, (a close offside call, a foul on the goalkeeper, the goalkeeper stepping over the line with the ball, etc) but nowhere near as often, and certainly not in every game. The “flow of play” is more of a consideration in soccer than it is in Rugby or Cricket too. Cricket is very stop start. Rugby is less so, but once a try has been attempted, everyone needs to get into another position whether the try is awarded or not. Soccer is much quicker to resume play after a stoppage. I still think they should use video replays in some cases in soccer, I’m just giving reasons why I think they’ve been a slow adopter. It won’t guarantee a correct decision in every single case, but if implemented correctly it dramatically decreases the chances of a game being decided on the whim of the referree. Not all fans like it when their teams victory is in dispute. Some of us just want a fair game 🙂 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-american-culture-makes-us-dislike-soccer/360535.md?page=9)