# Soccer



## Pepper (Jul 10, 2006)

I posted this in the WC thread, but thought I'd make a new thread and give you soccer-heads some flame-bait. 

OK, having just purchased a new 61 inch HDTV, I was willng to watch ANY sports as long as it was in HD. So, I watched some soccer even though I really hate the sport. Not that the world cares what Americans think of the sport, but here are my thoughts: 

The offsides rule is absurd. There is no logical reason why that 2nd goal yesterday should have been waived off. They gotta change that rule. It is counter-intuitive to let the defense decide where the offensive player can stand. I have asked numerous soccer-heads and have not received a solid answer as to why that rule is the way it is.
Scoring is too low. Way too many 1-1 or 0-0 OT games. This is why I call it communist kickball - lots of effort for very litte reward, just like communisim. I am not saying they need 7-6 games, but how about 3-2? or even 2-1?
The officiating is horrible. The fact that scoring is so low magnifies this.
Men do not flop around and pretend to be hurt like that. Yes, basketball players flop to get a charge call, etc, but nothing like these soccer players. There is little honor in pretending to be hurt so that a guy in shorts waives a card at the other team.
All in all, my opinion of soccer went up a little, but I don't see why it is so popular. It does seem to have the excitment of chess and the strategy of bingo.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Jul 10, 2006)

1)"Biggest" sporting competition in the world...Check

2)Each team scored 1 point...Boring as fuck, but I s'pose I would let it slide.

3)Outcome based off a 1 on 1 shootout between the goalie and 5 different players...Fucking ridiculous, how does that promote the concept of team?


----------



## Doublebase (Jul 10, 2006)

I find soccer extremely boring.  I can respect the sport.  There are some great athletes in it.  I can watch a whole game and see 5 shots at the goal.  Not very exciting IMO.  It is a huge sport though so what do I know.


----------



## Richie1888 (Jul 10, 2006)

soccer god damm u americans its 

*FOOTBALL*

lol had to be said


----------



## I Are Baboon (Jul 10, 2006)

After watching a some World Cup games, I found some MLS games while channel surfing.  Holy shit do those MLS players suck in comparison.  No wonder MLS games draw about 2,000 people to each game.  It was like watching college hockey, then flipping to an NHL game.  VERY noticable difference in the level of play.


----------



## Pepper (Jul 10, 2006)

Richie1888 said:
			
		

> soccer god damm u americans its
> 
> *FOOTBALL*
> 
> lol had to be said


 
Football is played on the weekends, by large men who never pretend to be hurt to get a call.


----------



## Richie1888 (Jul 10, 2006)

Pepper said:
			
		

> Football is played on the weekends, by large men who never pretend to be hurt to get a call.



football when do they actually use their feet ?


----------



## fufu (Jul 10, 2006)

Yeah I think players should be fined or given a penalty for pretending to be hurt, that is such bullshit. That is why I don't watch soccer, among other things.


----------



## tucker01 (Jul 10, 2006)

Diving was meant to be more enforced during the world cup.  In the earlier rounds you saw some Yellow Cards issued for diving.  That would lead to an automatic 5000 euro fine.  

But once they got into the elimintation games, the refs didn't call shit.


----------



## Richie1888 (Jul 10, 2006)

Richie1888 said:
			
		

> soccer god damm u americans its
> 
> *FOOTBALL*
> 
> lol had to be said




SOCCER?


----------



## Big Smoothy (Jul 10, 2006)

Pepper said:
			
		

> [*]The offsides rule is absurd. There is no logical reason why that 2nd goal yesterday should have been waived off. They gotta change that rule. It is counter-intuitive to let the defense decide where the offensive player can stand. I have asked numerous soccer-heads and have not received a solid answer as to why that rule is the way it is.



Interesting point.  I don't what to think on this. 



> Scoring is too low. Way too many 1-1 or 0-0 OT games.



The ball has been change to increase scoring.  But I do think we may be too used to high scoring in the U.S.

Example: MLB has changed field to increase homeruns. ($$$)

NBA is high scoring.  NFL.



> The officiating is horrible.



Agreed.  The officiating is outright awful. 



> Men do not flop around and pretend to be hurt like that. Yes, basketball players flop to get a charge call, etc, but nothing like these soccer players. There is little honor in pretending to be hurt so that a guy in shorts waives a card at the other team.



Yes, this faking drives me nuts.  Guy is rolling around in agony on the ground.  The on the slow-mo reply, we see him _intentionally_ trip over himself, and a foul is called or a yellow card is displayed.   Wimps!


----------



## fufu (Jul 10, 2006)

It would seem soccer is a very easy sport to rig.


----------



## luisfigo_benfic (Jul 10, 2006)

> Originaly posted by fufu:
> players should be fined or given a penalty for pretending to be hurt



They are... if its obvious enough they can be thrown out or suspended w/o pay by FIFA


----------



## Pepper (Jul 10, 2006)

There is plenty of room between the scoring in WC games and the typical American "higher scoring is good" mentality.

Clearly, you can go too far with scoring. I am not suggesting that they change soccer so that it is like Arena Football. Just get a couple or three more goals per game. A good NFL game is 21-14 which would translate to 3-2 in soccer.


----------



## shiznit2169 (Jul 10, 2006)

The only reason why soccer is so popular outside of the US is because that's the only sport that they have! They don't have the NFL. Basketball and Hockey are not even remotely close to the skill level and popularity like it is in the US. Why do you think great players from other countries come to the US to enter the draft for these sports? More money and better competition. 

Like Mabry said, the outcome always results in a penalty shootout. I have never seen a good game result in 4-3 or 3-2. It's always 1-0 or 0-0 and it's usually a cheap/lucky goal from a penalty kick that shouldn't have been called or a corner kick. Offsides rule is pathetic. 

Simply put, soccer sucks.


----------



## MCx2 (Jul 10, 2006)

Richie1888 said:
			
		

> football when do they actually use their feet ?



Never. They shimmy around on their asses the whole time...


----------



## fufu (Jul 10, 2006)

luisfigo_benfic said:
			
		

> They are... if its obvious enough they can be thrown out or suspended w/o pay by FIFA



Even if they aren't obvious, I think it is horrible sportsmanship.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Jul 10, 2006)

FatCatMC said:
			
		

> Never. They shimmy around on their asses the whole time...




Actually, 1 or 2 people use their feet exclusively.

I think if they shortened the *soccer* field, *soccer* would be better.  Still, playing soccer is fun, and hard.


----------



## Richie1888 (Jul 10, 2006)

shiznit2169 said:
			
		

> The only reason why soccer is so popular outside of the US is because that's the only sport that they have! They don't have the NFL. Basketball and Hockey are not even remotely close to the skill level and popularity like it is in the US. Why do you think great players from other countries come to the US to enter the draft for these sports? More money and better competition.
> 
> Like Mabry said, the outcome always results in a penalty shootout. I have never seen a good game result in 4-3 or 3-2. It's always 1-0 or 0-0 and it's usually a cheap/lucky goal from a penalty kick that shouldn't have been called or a corner kick. Offsides rule is pathetic.
> 
> Simply put, soccer sucks.



i dont want to sound like im trying for a fight here cause im not 

but at the end of the day its the biggest sport on the world and no mater how much u lot talk up the super bowl its not in the world cups league not even the european championships league.


----------



## tucker01 (Jul 10, 2006)

There is no point in arguing which is better, we are comparing to completely different cultures.

And until Soccer gets commercialized and hyped like every other major sport in North America, no one in the US will follow.


----------



## Pepper (Jul 10, 2006)

IainDaniel said:
			
		

> There is no point in arguing which is better, we are comparing to completely different cultures.
> 
> And until Soccer gets commercialized and hyped like every other major sport in North America, no one in the US will follow.


 
My point is that soccer has some fundamental "flaws" that will keep it from gaining popularity - hype or no hype. It is a physically demanding sport that requires a great deal of skill - it just could be tweaked to make it more interesting.

I'd also say that the WC received attention from the networks (ESPN, et al) disproporationate to the interest. So, I'd say the WC was "hyped" in the US.


----------



## tucker01 (Jul 10, 2006)

Pepper said:
			
		

> My point is that soccer has some fundamental "flaws" that will keep it from gaining popularity - hype or no hype. It is a physically demanding sport that requires a great deal of skill - it just could be tweaked to make it more interesting.
> 
> I'd also say that the WC received attention from the networks (ESPN, et al) disproporationate to the interest. So, I'd say the WC was "hyped" in the US.



Agree completely.  The Diving in the World Cup, the Offsides, and Refereeing were brutal for the most part during the world cup.  
I have relatives over from the UK right now, and they have stated that the diving has been aggresively reprimanded at the Club level.  So I don't know, what happened during the world cup. 

For the most part Americans, don't understand Soccer, nor the players (probably the biggest downfall) to even give the game a chance.


----------



## Pepper (Jul 10, 2006)

Seems to me they need more officials on the field. That field is huge.

Hockey added officials and it has helped.

If a guy is flopping, I'd think the official viewing it from the other angle would be better able to call "bullshit!"


----------



## MCx2 (Jul 10, 2006)

IainDaniel said:
			
		

> For the most part Americans, don't understand Soccer, nor the players (probably the biggest downfall) to even give the game a chance.



For the most part, Americans aren't drama queens, and from what I saw over the last two weeks, that quality makes for a good soccer player. Obviously America is giving the game a chance, or we wouldn't even bother with a professional league. However, in other countries across the world it seems the ultimate sporting dream is to kick the winning goal at the World Cup final. In America it's hitting the game winning home run, or throwing a touchdown with no time left on the clock to win the game. Americans like stuff that's their own, that's what the country has been built upon, our own traditions and our own history. Soccer has no part in American history or tradition therefore we don't take it as seriously as the rest of the world. To say we don't understand the game is just ignorant.


----------



## tucker01 (Jul 10, 2006)

> For the most part, Americans aren't drama queens, and from what I saw over the last two weeks, that quality makes for a good soccer player. Obviously America is giving the game a chance, or we wouldn't even bother with a professional league. However, in other countries across the world it seems the ultimate sporting dream is to kick the winning goal at the World Cup final. In America it's hitting the game winning home run, or throwing a touchdown with no time left on the clock to win the game. Americans like stuff that's their own, that's what the country has been built upon, our own traditions and our own history. Soccer has no part in American history or tradition therefore we don't take it as seriously as the rest of the world. To say we don't understand the game is just ignorant.


Haha are you kidding me.  All your games have been based on European Settlers child Games.  

Baseball = Rounders.

Except for Basketball.... That was invented by a Canadian


----------



## MCx2 (Jul 10, 2006)

IainDaniel said:
			
		

> Haha are you kidding me.  All your games have been based on European Settlers child Games.
> 
> Baseball = Rounders.



And that has what to do with your soccer statement?


----------



## MyK (Jul 10, 2006)

Pepper said:
			
		

> OK, having just purchased a new 61 inch HDTV, I was willng to watch ANY sports as long as it was in HD. So, I watched some soccer even though I really hate the sport. Not that the world cares what Americans think of the sport, but here are my thoughts:
> 
> The offsides rule is absurd. There is no logical reason why that 2nd goal yesterday should have been waived off. They gotta change that rule. It is counter-intuitive to let the defense decide where the offensive player can stand. I have asked numerous soccer-heads and have not received a solid answer as to why that rule is the way it is.
> 
> ...


----------



## tucker01 (Jul 10, 2006)

FatCatMC said:
			
		

> And that has what to do with your soccer statement?



Just found it humerous with this statement.



> In America it's hitting the game winning home run, or throwing a touchdown with no time left on the clock to win the game. Americans like stuff that's their own, that's what the country has been built upon, our own traditions and our own history. Soccer has no part in American history or tradition therefore we don't take it as seriously as the rest of the world. To say we don't understand the game is just ignorant.



For the most part every sport is a part of what the European settlers brought over.


----------



## MCx2 (Jul 10, 2006)

IainDaniel said:
			
		

> For the most part every sport is a part of what the European settlers brought over.



So who is your favorite European baseball team? Alot of talent comming out of France in the NFL eh? C'mon, now you're just being an asshole. Guess what America was before it was it's own country? A EUROPEAN SETTLEMENT, so that would stand to reason that the idea for those games came from Eurpoe now wouldn't it? Someone took the idea, and we refined it and made it our own. Americans simply aren't brought up to give two shits about soccer, plain and simple.


----------



## tucker01 (Jul 10, 2006)

Exactly Hence the numerous times I have brought up cultural differences, in where the sport is popular.

Twas kinda funny though


----------



## MyK (Jul 10, 2006)

*Ethnocentricity *is the tendency to look at the world primarily from the perspective of one's own ethnic culture. People often feel ethnocentric while experiencing what some call culture shock.

Various researchers study ethnocentricism as it pertains to their specialized fields. This article covers anthropology, political science and especially sociology.

This term was coined by William Graham Sumner, a social evolutionist and professor of Political and Social Science at Yale University. He defined it as the viewpoint that ???one???s own group is the center of everything,??? against which all other groups are judged. Ethnocentrism often entails the belief that one's own race or ethnic group is the most important and/or that some or all aspects of its culture are superior to those of other groups. Within this ideology, individuals will judge other groups in relation to their own particular ethnic group or culture, especially with concern to language, behaviour, customs, and religion. These ethnic distinctions and sub-divisions serve to define each ethnicity's unique cultural identity.


----------



## MCx2 (Jul 10, 2006)

MyK said:
			
		

> *Ethnocentricity *is the tendency to look at the world primarily from the perspective of one's own ethnic culture. People often feel ethnocentric while experiencing what some call culture shock.
> 
> Various researchers study ethnocentricism as it pertains to their specialized fields. This article covers anthropology, political science and especially sociology.
> 
> This term was coined by William Graham Sumner, a social evolutionist and professor of Political and Social Science at Yale University. He defined it as the viewpoint that ???one???s own group is the center of everything,??? against which all other groups are judged. Ethnocentrism often entails the belief that one's own race or ethnic group is the most important and/or that some or all aspects of its culture are superior to those of other groups. Within this ideology, individuals will judge other groups in relation to their own particular ethnic group or culture, especially with concern to language, behaviour, customs, and religion. These ethnic distinctions and sub-divisions serve to define each ethnicity's unique cultural identity.



And the following statement was made by a Canadian:



			
				IainDaniel said:
			
		

> For the most part Americans, don't understand Soccer, nor the players (probably the biggest downfall) to even give the game a chance.



How fitting.


----------



## MyK (Jul 10, 2006)

FatCatMC said:
			
		

> And the following statement was made by a Canadian:
> 
> 
> 
> How fitting.




Canadians are Americans. he is talking about all of north america and he is right!


----------



## MCx2 (Jul 10, 2006)

MyK said:
			
		

> Canadians are Americans. he is talking about all of north america and he is right!



  Let me guess, you got that fact from the same place you got the "Rugby players are 10 times more fit that NFL players" stat? And that's news to me that Americans = Canadians.


----------



## tucker01 (Jul 10, 2006)

We live in the Americas


----------



## shiznit2169 (Jul 10, 2006)

IainDaniel said:
			
		

> We live in the Americas



But not the United States  

Listen guys, you all should know that the NFL is one of the toughest sports in the world. Rugby is tough, yes, but Fatcat clearly explained in one of his posts why the NFL rules over it. We all have different opinions and interests so the arguments isn't going to solve anything. If you love soccer, fine but don't get on someone's case if they hate it (like me). It all depends on how you are brought up and what sports you have been involved in and so forth. Growing up near Boston and being raised by hardcore football and baseball parents, you know where i stand. Same for the Europeans who grew up around soccer.

If we all focused on one thing, the world wouldn't be interesting.


----------



## tucker01 (Jul 10, 2006)

shiznit2169 said:
			
		

> But not the United States
> 
> Listen guys, you all should know that the NFL is one of the toughest sports in the world. Rugby is tough, yes, but Fatcat clearly explained in one of his posts why the NFL rules over it. We all have different opinions and interests so the arguments isn't going to solve anything. If you love soccer, fine but don't get on someone's case if they hate it (like me). It all depends on how you are brought up and what sports you have been involved in and so forth. Growing up near Boston and being raised by hardcore football and baseball parents, you know where i stand. Same for the Europeans who grew up around soccer.
> 
> If we all focused on one thing, the world wouldn't be interesting.



NFL Rules based on your Cultural influences.  Yes

Ontario is pretty much the 51st state.  We lost any sort of Cultural Identity  with the massive influx in US industry and Commercialization.


----------



## JOHNYORK (Jul 10, 2006)

the reason soccer is the most popular sport in the world is simple all you need is a ball. where kids in america have the oppurtunity to be introduced to a variety of sports where in all these other countries they will never get the oppurtunity to play football, hockey, even basketball you need rims plus blacktop. its easy to find a game b/c all the kids dont have a nintendo either so what else is their to do. its sorta like cannellie beans in some ways but not in others.


----------



## fantasma62 (Jul 10, 2006)

shiznit2169 said:
			
		

> The only reason why soccer is so popular outside of the US is because that's the only sport that they have! They don't have the NFL. Basketball and Hockey are not even remotely close to the skill level and popularity like it is in the US. Why do you think great players from other countries come to the US to enter the draft for these sports? More money and better competition.
> 
> Like Mabry said, the outcome always results in a penalty shootout. I have never seen a good game result in 4-3 or 3-2. It's always 1-0 or 0-0 and it's usually a cheap/lucky goal from a penalty kick that shouldn't have been called or a corner kick. Offsides rule is pathetic.
> 
> Simply put, soccer sucks.


 
Before I begin, I am not trying to fight or flame anyone. I am just answering some points I don't agree with and I am picking this post because it pretty much sums up what everyone else is saying.
The Only sport they have? I'm sorry, didn't Argentina just beat the NBA players in the Olympics? Hockey? What happened to the US against the Europeans? The NFL? Australian Rules (they don't use pads) and they can't play the NFL europe outside of Germany because nobody cares.
C'mon now.
The reason why soccer is so popular is simple....it's cheap to play....
What do you need to play organized baseball? basketball? Football? Now, can you tell me what you need to play soccer? a ball made out of whatever you want. Some brazilians play with coconuts, why? can't afford a real ball. Some make a ball out of paper and rubber bands. You can make a goal out of anything. Thus, the must played game in the world. 

I am a sports fanatic, and that includes soccer. The outcomes have to end up in a penalty shoot out. Exactly how many games do these guys play a year? Who knows. If they have to run like hell for 90 minutes in a sport where there arent many substitutions and have to continue playing overtimes until somebody wins exactly how do they score goals? The first thing to go are the legs, which is their main weapon. What do you do if you lose your legs? Throw it in? The result would be handball, it already exists...

Regarding the offsides rules, I don't find them pathetic. Guys would simply play on the other side of the field waiting for someone to just kick the hell out of the ball. This may make it more attractive to the american public because the games would be in reality 15-14 or 20-15, etc. Thus more scoring. However, it would also forego things like strategy, coaching, the art of passing the ball and an 11 on 11 game, making it a 6 on 6 since defenders would not be needed. We could make the goals smaller, make the field smaller and turn it into Lacrosse, or maybe put walls around the field, allow a few fights and turn it into hockey.....thus more exciting for most americans.

The only way that we in the US may begin liking soccer is if the US team decides to somehow stop sucking and try to win the cup.  We (excluding the Chicago, Boston, Green Bay and some New York fans) are bandwagon jumpers. I remember back in the 90's when figure skating was the rage because of Nancy Kerrigan and Tonya Harding. Hell, everyone was a fan. How about us Marlins fans, we sit about 8-10k per game and the team goes to the World Series and 65,000 people are going? Those are examples. Once we stop sucking, things may change. Has anyone caught a glimpse of the MLS? It is god aweful. Until they stop making guys like Landon Donovan the star of the national team, the US will be mired in mediocrity.  The US players need to go play outside of the MLS and go to Europe where the money is really good and the play is superior.....
That's all folks...peace


----------



## fantasma62 (Jul 10, 2006)

shiznit2169 said:
			
		

> But not the United States
> 
> Listen guys, you all should know that the NFL is one of the toughest sports in the world. Rugby is tough, yes, but Fatcat clearly explained in one of his posts why the NFL rules over it. We all have different opinions and interests so the arguments isn't going to solve anything. If you love soccer, fine but don't get on someone's case if they hate it (like me). It all depends on how you are brought up and what sports you have been involved in and so forth. Growing up near Boston and being raised by hardcore football and baseball parents, you know where i stand. Same for the Europeans who grew up around soccer.
> 
> If we all focused on one thing, the world wouldn't be interesting.


 
I agree with you. Rugby is boring to me (I played it and I sucked, so there....). I feel that football is superior, but then again, I am in the US. I also agree that you have a right to hate soccer. But as I said earlier, you say soccer sucks, you are right, it's your opinion and you say your peace. Just like you can say that, I can also say, without pushing everyone's face in it, that soccer is great....

Opinions, like colors are abundant....I hope you didn't feel that I was trying to flame you earlier, that was not my intent....

By the way, if you want to see a tough as hell sport that I just don't understand, try to watch Australian Rules Football. It's kinda like soccer and tackle football (or with no pads), wrestling and rugby mixed together (c'mon Aussies, don't get mad at me, I find it fascinating even if I don't understand it)


----------



## MyK (Jul 10, 2006)

shiznit2169 said:
			
		

> But not the United States
> 
> Listen guys, you all should know that the NFL is one of the toughest sports in the world. Rugby is tough, yes, but Fatcat clearly explained in one of his posts why the NFL rules over it. We all have different opinions and interests so the arguments isn't going to solve anything. *If you love soccer, fine but don't get on someone's case if they hate it (like me*). It all depends on how you are brought up and what sports you have been involved in and so forth. Growing up near Boston and being raised by hardcore football and baseball parents, you know where i stand. Same for the Europeans who grew up around soccer.
> 
> If we all focused on one thing, the world wouldn't be interesting.



OK, thats cool, the next time theres a thread about football, I'll get in it and start talking about how much it sucks and its so boring blah blah blah. and then when I get flamed I'll be like "dont flame me I grew up in England and like socccer more"  your arogance is truly astonishing sometimes!


----------



## shiznit2169 (Jul 10, 2006)

MyK said:
			
		

> OK, thats cool, the next time theres a thread about football, I'll get in it and start talking about how much it sucks and its so boring blah blah blah. and then when I get flamed I'll be like "dont flame me I grew up in England and like socccer more"  your arogance is truly astonishing sometimes!



Actually, i wouldn't do that at all. You would have to provide some valid points on why you hate football and i already stated mine for soccer. I wouldn't flame you at all. I would just post a counter-argument just like you did to me about soccer. Catch my drift?

Arrogant you say? Well, your words not mine.


----------



## pengers84 (Jul 10, 2006)

I am not even a true soccer fan but i can not understand how anyone could not love the world cup.  Ah well its there loss.


----------



## pengers84 (Jul 10, 2006)

Pepper said:
			
		

> My point is that soccer has some fundamental "flaws" that will keep it from gaining popularity - hype or no hype. It is a physically demanding sport that requires a great deal of skill - it just could be tweaked to make it more interesting.
> 
> I'd also say that the WC received attention from the networks (ESPN, et al) disproporationate to the interest. So, I'd say the WC was "hyped" in the US.




The lack of interest is due to the U.S teams lack of success.  The majority of sports fans are bandwagon fans.  Who wants to waste their time and money to watch a subpar performance? When the U.S hosted the World Cup and performed well in 1994 the average attendance was 86,373 for the U.S teams games.  For the WC to be a popular in the U.S European clubs nead to recruit more U.S players and develop them into world class players, simple as that.  There is no point trying to develop a stronger U.S League as with Australia it would be a waste of time.


----------



## Pepper (Jul 11, 2006)

pengers84 said:
			
		

> The lack of interest is due to the U.S teams lack of success.


 
I completely disagree. I think sports fans would appreciate the high level of play if the game were more interesting. 

I keep reading how Americans want scores to be 15-14. That is absurd and it is not what I am talking about. What is wrong with 3-2? It gives you more excitement, more payoff for good play, less chance a bad PK call wins the game, etc.

One more thing, I understand why there is an offsides rule. There has to be. There is one in hockey too. What I don't understand is why the defense player gets to set where the offense player can stand. THat is completely counter-intuitive. You take that goal that was waived off in the WC final. How was that guy "snow-birding" or "cherry-picking?" He wasn't. He was defended, beat the defense and scored. However he was 1 inch behind the last defender. That is BS.

You take the ridiculously low scoring, some just awful rules, poor officiating and you will have a hard time getting US interest.

Someone has the stats I am sure...how many WC games were 0-0 or 1-1?


----------



## fantasma62 (Jul 11, 2006)

Pepper said:
			
		

> I completely disagree. I think sports fans would appreciate the high level of play if the game were more interesting.
> 
> I keep reading how Americans want scores to be 15-14. That is absurd and it is not what I am talking about. What is wrong with 3-2? It gives you more excitement, more payoff for good play, less chance a bad PK call wins the game, etc.
> 
> ...


 
Pepper, you make valid points, however, when I mention scores of 15-14 because that is exactly what would happen if the offside rule wasn't in place. If the players are allowed to just sit there behind the defense and just play a long ball game, then, as I said, you would have to eliminate half of the players in that team (midfielders) because it would just be one long kick to a guy standing in front of the goal who would make it in 95% of the time due to the size of the goal while really playing against one guy, the goalie. Regarding that inch, I'll give you an example from football. Exactly what difference does it make if a DT is or isn't an inch into the neutral zone? It can give a player an unfair advantage over his opponent in either positioning or a better push into the backfield (that's what I played and hated the offside-neutral zone rule). In soccer, an inch offsides is the same as if they also increased the perceived strike zone by an inch or decreased it by an inch. Would it be fair to call it an offsides "give or take an inch"? Offsides was created to avoid "Cherry Picking", you can't as a referee waive off the offsides because the guy was 1/8 of an inch offsides. It is still offsides. Just like the 3 second rule in basketball isn't the 3 to 5 second rule. It's 3 seconds....

Also, my mention that we here in the US would like it to be 15-14 was no doubt an exageration from me just to make a point regarding the offside rule, however, if you listen to radio or read what people are saying, americans get bored because of low scoring. You ask the question regarding how many 0-0 games there were or 1-1. People always say, "man I wish they would end like 7-6 or 9-8 instead of 1-0". I understand that most of the talk radio callers are somewhat moronic, but in this case they are simply stating their opinions.

One last thing, horrible officiating? Ins't that the story of our sports here in the US? Bad calls, bad officiating? Examples: the coin toss (they screwed up a freaking coin toss) in the Steelers game, the Jordan rules (now called the Wade/Lebron rules), the late Eric Gregg's strike zone in the '97 NL playoffs, hell Pepper, what happened to the Seahawks in the Super Bowl?, Dallas vs. Miami in the latest NBA playoffs where Dallas fans are still talking about the foul calls and that famous timeout that supposedly they never called, which takes me back to Shaq being officiated differently per game his whole career (Ok, I guess now I am just official-venting). I think we should remove bad officiating out of the equation because I am sure that even in Water Polo and Badminton there is bad officiating. 

What a long winded freaking response, I can't just give 3 o4 word answers...


----------



## fantasma62 (Jul 11, 2006)

By the way, Pepper, I hope you don't think I am picking on you. 
I am also not trying to shove soccer down your throat.  I am just clarifying some things.  I know you are not going to like soccer and that's fine and fair.

I also would like to thank you because you helped me vent regarding bad officiating...boy that felt good.
Not trying to offend you here...


----------



## pengers84 (Jul 11, 2006)

I do see where your coming from pepper but i think you can view your points positively or negatively.  

Low scores can also be exciting, games might come down to only a few oppurtunities and whether they are taken or not can be quite dramatic.  Also the fact that it is so hard to score in soccer makes it possible for a weaker team (such as Australia) to have a chance of at least drawing against a stronger team, I think this is a major drawpoint of the game, or maybe I see it like that just because Im Australian lol, but still the underdog has a chance. 

 If the 50th ranked team played the 1st ranked team in the majority of other team sports it would be a witewash.  In rugby this would be the equivalent of New Zealand vs Kazakhstan which i would estimate being somwhere between 120-150 to nil.  This has nothing to do with depth in the game either, on paper Brazil are far superior than Australia as NewZealand is compared with Kazakhstan but the structure of soccer allowed Australia to provide a decent contest for the worlds number 1 team.  In soccer there are no easy wins, a characteristic in my opinion unique to the game and the reason it is so popular.

Yes the scores are low and this would show up in statistics but you have to appreciate the closeness of the games.  In the entire  World Cup there were only a few blowouts.  I think if it's made easier to score goals the best teams would dominate and the soccer world cup would become similar to the rugby or cricket world cups, with half the games being a waste of time. 

In regards to the officiating, i see your point as I was heartbroken when the Australians were robbed by a bad call versus the Italians.  On the other hand I think sports are over officiated these days, take rugby leauge in Australia almost every decision is taken to the third umpire which eliminates the excitement of possible human error, I know everyone hates bad decisions against there team but it also provides entertainment.

I can understand many of the points against soccer as i felt the same way but after spending time in Europe it was impossible not to grow to love the game, you just have to give the game a go, which I was forced to do. Im sure the same would apply to American football if i was to live in the U.S, which i plan to do someday.


----------

