I don’t think you’re as objective as you think:)
I’m guessing that the hatred is a knee-jerk reaction to being told that “the whole world loves soccer, so you should too.”
Other than that, it’s pretty much like any other sport: you have to take the time to learn what’s going on, otherwise it’s just a boring semi-random jumble of people doing semi-random things. I’m not talking about the rules, as most people can get the gist of the rules of almost any sport within a matter of minutes or hours. I’m talking about understanding why players line up like they do, and what this could mean. Why a particular substitution changes the whole nature of the game. Being able to read the psychology of both teams, to see who has the mental edge.
I grew up playing soccer and baseball as organised sports. I played football any chance I could. I sucked at basketball and hockey, but I loved watching them. So now I have to explain to my german friends why football is a great sport, if you know what’s going on. They just nod and smile and repeat that it’s just a bunch of guys running into each other. sigh
But here’s why I would like America to invest more in soccer: I would love to beat the crap (figuratively! 
) out of every smug, patronising “we only have one sport” country out there. I love my german friends, but they can be so damn insufferable when it comes to soccer superiority.
This attitude does not characterize a lot of soccer fans. I’m sure there’s the occasional soccer snob, but hardly more than there would be for any other sport. Many posters in this thread appear to believe that soccer fans the world over seem to have a giant problem with the US failing to love soccer as much as everyone else does, but honestly, we have better things to worry about. Do Americans worry that people in the rest of the world aren’t dropping whatever they’re doing to start following NFL and playing American Football? No - of course not. The fans’ enjoyment of the sport is hardly diminished by other people not caring. The same is true for soccer fans.
This perceived idea about the world’s attitude is for the most part fictional. Maybe it’s based on a freak encounter with some people that are jerks about their sport (but that does not reflect on the sport as a whole, I don’t think). But for a part it seems to be an entirely imaginary view of the world that is not based on any knowledge about the sport of soccer, its fans, and the parts of the world they’re from.
If you think the sport’s boring and that’s why you’re not watching soccer, that’s fair enough. But it’s goddamn stupid if you’re not watching soccer because you think other people call you stupid for not watching soccer and you’re probably not even correct about them calling you that or anything else in the first place.
Brilliant! I thought of that episode as soon as I saw this thread.
Those “1-0 games where the score in no way represents what actually happened on the field” are my biggest problem with soccer. A team can totally “Dominate” the action, but not have the miracle of scoring a goal bestowed on them, and then lose 1-0 because of some fluky penalty shot, or even worse, lose on that stupid ass shootout at the end of a game. I really do enjoy watching a soccer game once in a while, and when scoring opportunities come up, they are very exciting. But actual goals are so rare that once a team goes up by a goal they can go into pure defensive mode and just keep kicking the ball out of bounds.
what you see as a negative, others see as a positive. Individual upsets are possible whilst in a league situation the best team always ends up on top.
The great thing about soccer is that it’s a game for everyone, even sociopaths.
While soccer has been given decades to catch on in popularity in the US, I’m wondering why Australian Rules Football hasn’t taken off here. One late night I was watching some random AFL game on ESPN and had NO idea what was going on, but I found it exciting and interesting anyway. I’ve since watched some stuff about it on YouTube and I find it fascinating. It’s got elements of soccer, American football, basketball. I think this is the sport that Americans would embrace.
Quite simply, if they didn’t score then they weren’t good enough. Are there any sports where you get points just for trying? They all have a scoring method and if you didn’t do that method then you weren’t good enough.
I’m sorry, what?
I can’t find a clip on Youtube, but there was an episode of Time Trax back in the 90s that expressed this exact sentiment. Apparently in 200 years, Australian Rules will be the most popular sport in America and American football has mostly disappeared.
I presume he’s referring to a workplace sweepstake, where everyone pays a dollar and draws a team out of the hat. The person who drew the winning team at the end wins the money.
It’s not like you’re “assigned a team to support”, though. It’s just a bit of fun.
Another flaw in soccer (and ice hockey for that matter) forward progress toward scoring is too easily thwarted.
That’s not a flaw, that’s a characteristic.
Soccer does have some violence.
And fans sometimes take the game a little too seriously.
Why you gotta hate on boxing like that?
I’ve thought about this subject on and off for quite a while, and I’ve reached the conclusion that soccer is one of those games where defense has it way, WAY too easy. It really boils down to five things: field size, hands, hitting, offside, and wildly heaving the ball down the field (and the viability of thereof).
Let’s take basketball. The court is very small. All ball movement and shooting is done with the hands, most of it with the fingers. Not only is hitting of any kind not allowed, even simply hand checking is a foul. There is no offside. Throwing the ball downcourt is permitted, but this is an offensive maneuver, not simply a means to avoid being scored on. The upshot is that defense’s only real options are to swipe the ball (next to impossible at the college or NBA level), pick off a pass (which requires an alert defender moving in absolutely the right direction at absolutely the right time), or block a shot (ditto); otherwise, all they can do is run around and flap their arms a lot and hope this annoys the shooter into missing. Scores, needless to say, are very high; even the feeblest offense can easily break 50.
Lacrosse. The field is about average. All ball movement is done with sticks, which are not as precise as fingers but are capable of amazingly fast shots. No tackling or checking is permitted, making it much easier for attackers to get into position and move the ball around to set up shots. There’s no offside rule I’m aware of. Just slinging the ball downfield results in a pointless turnover. All this leads to a fast-paced game with frequent scoring; 30 or more total points in a game is not unheard of.
Hockey. The ice is fairly small. Puck movement is done with sticks, and the puck is so small that stealing (poke checking) is pretty much impossible. Hitting is permitted, but only on the puckhandler and from the front. There is offside, but it’s determined by clearly demarcated lines; none of that position-of-the-defender garbage. Slamming the puck to the opposite end is an icing violation, which results in a faceoff close to the offender’s goal, so there’s nothing to gain by this. In all, defense has its work cut out for it, and there are plenty of scoring chances each game. How close it is depends largely on just how good the defense is, particularly the goalkeeper. It can be 1-0, it can be 4-2, it can be 7-1; there’s a pretty big range of scores.
And then, soccer. The field is enormous. Hands are not permitted, and it doesn’t matter how wide the goal is, kicking or heading just isn’t going to be accurate. Charging is permitted under some circumstances, and slide tackling can be done at any time so long as it’s from the front. Offside is screwy and incredibly liberal, to the point where tricking the attacker into going offside (something that’s not possible in hockey) is actually a common strategy. Blasting the ball down the field not only carries no repercussions, it’s the best thing to do when the ball’s deep in one’s own territory. The worst-case scenario is that it goes out the opposite end for a goal kick, and the field is so massive that this hardly matters. Even worse, penalties are absolutely toothless…a “free kick”, which accomplishes every bit as much as the all the full price kicks over the course of the game.
Look, I don’t have a trouble with low-scoring games so long as they make sense. A 7-3 game in football is the result of two overpowering, crushing defenses or two anemic, sputtering offenses (or both). A 1-0 game in baseball is a classic pitchers’ duel. A 2-1 game in hockey is a gritty smash-mouth meatgrinder. 1-0 or 0-0 in soccer? Just another day at the office, and a full game looks almost indistinguishable from the 4-3 or 6-0 games. As long as a powerful attack is almost never rewarded, and when it is rewarded it’s usually pure luck or some weird fluke, I’ll never get into this game.
Again, there’s no reward for trying. That’s what kid’s games do. You get awarded for putting the ball in the net, not for “a powerful attack”. To be honest, absolutely every sport I can think of right now works that way, so I am quite at a loss as to why you think it doesn’t in the American sports.
Well frankly, if you can accept that “1-0 game in baseball is a classic pitchers’ duel” but you can’t see how a 0-0 can be a battle of the two defences then it is simply your lack of knowledge of the sport.
But anyway, good to see we are going down to how low scoring things are again. Do we need reminding again that, for example, the average goals scored in game in the English Premier League of the past decade has been over 2.5? And the past four years has been higher than that, encroaching upon 3.
http://touchline2boardroom.com/the-future-game-adapt-or-die/attachment/3/
I’m just thinking that this old Geico commercial is germane to this discussion:
