Anti-soccer blog post

[Coy]

WOW

[youtube]0MRmxfLuNto[/youtube]

What an answer bro, no possible comeback for this guy, congratulations.

 

[Hostile]

All of the so-called "arrogance" is on the other side of the fence. "How dare you stupid, insular Americans not embrace our beautiful game?!" In short, we're despised for our indifference. They've got 99% of the world's adoration and attention yet they're still not happy. If they'd lay off the insults and stop trying to shove the game down our throats, that'd be swell.

ost:

 

[daschoo]

Two kids in an isolated island in the middle of the Pacific can play it. Or that can get a ball of rags and play it in the poorest slums of Johannesburg. Point being it's the least technologically advanced sport that can be played.

not even going to justify the rest with further answering but on this point i just wondered why you think two kids kicking a ball of rags back and forward any more accurately represents football than the same two kids throwing their ball of rags represents american football?

 

[ABQcowboyJR]

Stolen from a political site that I frequent:

I have a liberal friend who’s rabid about soccer. He even writes as a blog/journalist on some soccer web sites. So I gave him my rundown on why I don’t like soccer and it has nothing to do with politics or low scores. And I think the majority of Americans probably would agree with it.

Single-dimensional game. Most American sports require multi-dimensional skill sets…throwing, running, kicking, hitting, tackling, catching, dribbling, shooting, etc…Soccer is single-dimensional. Running and kicking. That’s it.

Luck or skill? When only 1 out of 20 passes in front of the goal results in a legitimate shot on goal attempt, (score or no score), it starts to look more like luck than skill. With such a low percentage it gives the appearance (rightly or wrongly) that they just kick it around until somebody lucks into a shot. The “successful assist” percentage needs to be much higher. Imagine if only 1 in 20 basketball passes resulted in a shot. Hockey actually suffers from the same problem, but even their “assists” percentage is higher than soccer.

Kicking it away from the other team. Any sport where you deliberately just kick it down to the opposite end as far as you can just to get it away from your end is suspect. Once again, Hockey pleads guilty to this as well. At least in football punts are caught and run back and can potentially result in one of the most exciting plays of the game.

Athleticism… in the USA the best athletes play 1) football 2) basketball 3) baseball 4) hockey 5) the rest (including soccer). Any sport where our 5th best athletes can match up on the world level with the best athletes from the other countries doesn’t say much for the athleticism and skill level of the game as a whole. Our 5th best athletes should rightly be getting their butts kicked. If they’re not, then the other guys aren’t that good either. Which takes you back to…luck or skill (see #2).

Celebrating a tie….any sport where you celebrate a tie…especially when somebody else booted the ball to allow you to score…is suspect.

I really think soccer athletes just don’t match up to football/basketball/baseball athletes. Yes, they run longer distances…but so do marathon runners. They’re not faster, stronger, quicker, higher jumpers, etc…they just have more stamina. Other than that they’re not very impressive as far as “athletes” go…not compared to traditional-American-sport athletes. And that is why Americans don’t care for soccer. We’re just not that impressed.

An interesting take on things.
1) Probably the most ridiculous thing posted in this thread thus far. All there is in basketball is dribbling and shooting, all there is in baseball is hitting and catching, all there is in football is running and tackling, get my drift....?

2) If it were simply a luck based game there would be no dominate teams.

3) A ton of punts in football simply go out of bounds. You can walk a hitter in baseball. You can hackashaq in basketball. There really is no difference at all.

4) This might be the only thing with a shred of credibility. The only thing i can point out here is my personal experience. Being around competitive sports such as baseball soccer football, the best athletes were the ones playing soccer. The best athletes in the us don't play soccer because thats not where the money is at.

And when it comes to the complaints with the clock......come on guys. You always know how much time is left, its really not that hard. Its no issue for the players, and the fans of the sport seem to be able to figure it out.

 

[Rampage]

[youtube]noOHdTQd6H8[/youtube]

 

[bbgun]

An interesting take on things.
1) Probably the most ridiculous thing posted in this thread thus far. All there is in basketball is dribbling and shooting,

Plus passing and lots of scoring.

all there is in baseball is hitting and catching

Plus throwing, pitching, sliding and lots of scoring.

all there is in football is running and tackling,

Plus throwing, catching, blocking, kicking and lots of scoring.

get my drift....?

Sadly, I do.

 

[bbgun]

[youtube]noOHdTQd6H8[/youtube]

:laugh2:

classic

 

[theogt]

I understand your confusion. I usually avoid calling posters out specifically, as it tends to turn into a classic message board flame war. But since you've asked, I did take issue with your "wussified" comment but more so SaltwaterServr's post on page 6. By "take issue" I don't mean horribly offended. I mean, this topic really isn't all that serious. But the latter post at least certainly took things from a couple of harmless jabs to what I called "nauseating arrogance".

And of course, relative to football, it isn't physical. Not many sports are. But that was never an argument brought up in the thread. Or at least, I must have missed it.

I consider any sport in which leagues of 6 year old girls participate to be "wussified." This isn't exclusive to soccer and doesn't mean anything other than that I dislike the sport. There are many more reasons why I dislike the sport (another being the lack of complex strategy). But in any event I'm not sure how that's an arrogant statement.

I agree that SalwaterServr's post has an arrogance to it -- it's completely true, but yeah, I see the point.

 

[SaltwaterServr]

What an answer bro, no possible comeback for this guy, congratulations.

Funny thing, ALL the points I'm making are the precise opposite of what I've read in a few articles on why the World Cup is internationally significant. I flipped them 180 and people get all kinds of upset. The technology argument I saw on here sometime last year. I laughed at it then, I laugh at it now. Although I think that thread said something along the lines of nly needing a rock to kick.

Yeah soccer fans in the immortal words of Bill Parcells, you've been sucked. Now I have no idea whose articles I was reading nor their talent in the journalistic arts, they may have been the equivalent of the futbol bleacherrepport.com.

I actually don't mind soccer all that much. The higher end matches in the Copa de Oro and Copa de Americas are pretty high octane as have been the Worl Cup matches that get past this first points round.

The one thing I really don't like is in 2002 or 1998 when the World Cup was decided by penalty kicks. That's like lining up 5 of your best players to attempt field goals at the end of overtime in the Super Bowl.

 

[daschoo]

Funny thing, ALL the points I'm making are the precise opposite of what I've read in a few articles on why the World Cup is internationally significant. I flipped them 180 and people get all kinds of upset. The technology argument I saw on here sometime last year. I laughed at it then, I laugh at it now. Although I think that thread said something along the lines of nly needing a rock to kick.

Yeah soccer fans in the immortal words of Bill Parcells, you've been sucked. Now I have no idea whose articles I was reading nor their talent in the journalistic arts, they may have been the equivalent of the futbol bleacherrepport.com.

I actually don't mind soccer all that much. The higher end matches in the Copa de Oro and Copa de Americas are pretty high octane as have been the Worl Cup matches that get past this first points round.

The one thing I really don't like is in 2002 or 1998 when the World Cup was decided by penalty kicks. That's like lining up 5 of your best players to attempt field goals at the end of overtime in the Super Bowl.

that was burm arguing that the only reason i like soccer is because i'm a poverty stricken moron who lives in a 3rd world country so i'm afraid you've not turned anything 180

 

[ABQcowboyJR]

Plus passing and lots of scoring.



Plus throwing, pitching, sliding and lots of scoring.



Plus throwing, catching, blocking, kicking and lots of scoring.



Sadly, I do.

:laugh2: And proved my point to a further extent.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Those guys are in far better shape than other athletes though.

At least 8 players every game play at least 90 minutes, running maybe 10 km during that time.

All other sports allow unlimited subsitutions.

 

[Undisputed]

I consider any sport in which leagues of 6 year old girls participate to be "wussified." This isn't exclusive to soccer and doesn't mean anything other than that I dislike the sport. There are many more reasons why I dislike the sport (another being the lack of complex strategy). But in any event I'm not sure how that's an arrogant statement.

Well if describing any sport you dislike as "wussified" is just your thing then of course it wouldn't necessarily be an arrogant statement. But when most people say such a thing, I think it'd be reasonable to assume that they are using "wuss" in the traditional/dictionary sense, arguing that the sport was for the "weak and timid".

And apparently SaltWaterServr laid a trap for me...I guess...?

 

[bbgun]

:laugh2: And proved my point to a further extent.

Hardly. Your allegation was that American sports were as facile or two-dimensional as soccer, and it took me five seconds to prove that false.

 

[ABQcowboyJR]

Hardly. Your allegation was that American sports were as facile or two-dimensional as soccer, and it took me five seconds to prove that false.

No I made the same statement about American sports as you did soccer. You don't see why its ridiculous yet?

 

[theogt]

Well if describing any sport you dislike as "wussified" is just your thing then of course it wouldn't necessarily be an arrogant statement. But when most people say such a thing, I think it'd be reasonable to assume that they are using "wuss" in the traditional/dictionary sense, arguing that the sport was for the "weak and timid".

And apparently SaltWaterServr laid a trap for me...I guess...?

No, this is not what I intended -- apologies for not being more clear. I described it as "wussified" because it lacks physical contact to the point that 6 year old girls can play the sport. And I dislike it, at least in part, because of that fact. I try to be efficient in my use of words. I thought the term "wussified" was sufficient to get this point across, but I suppose not.

 

[SaltwaterServr]

that was burm arguing that the only reason i like soccer is because i'm a poverty stricken moron who lives in a 3rd world country so i'm afraid you've not turned anything 180

I was pretty much just regurgitating that part. I remember that thread because we had just played a 10 goal game on my restaurants enclosed patio using a lemon wrapped in duct tape. Two chairs were the goals. Fun until the owners caught us on the security cameras. Oops.

I think Major League Soccer in the US is truly doing itself a disfavor by not cultivating the existing soccer fans amoung the immigrant population along the US/Mexico border. People in San Antonio would go nuts for a MLS team here. Hell, staff in every restaurant I've ever worked in request Sunday morning off to play in the city leagues. Lots of soccer fans left untapped in central and south Texas. Grow from within the existing fan base, but MLS is soerly missing the mark in my opninion.

 

[bbgun]

No I made the same statement about American sports as you did soccer. You don't see why its ridiculous yet?

There's no comparison. We like our indigenous sports just fine, and aside from golf or hockey, there's no need to import another one.

 

[ABQcowboyJR]

There's no comparison. We like our indigenous sports just fine, and aside from golf or hockey, there's no need to import another one.

There is no reason not to as well.

This thread is full of so many broad sweeping statements. No need for everyone to deal in absolutes.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

There's no comparison. We like our indigenous sports just fine, and aside from golf or hockey, there's no need to import another one.

Must kill you that basketball was created by a Canadian