Reply With Quote
No talk about today's "thrilling" 1-1 PK win by Germany?
The thing is that people around the world tear into us for not being soccer-mad like them, some even going as far as to say we're not as sophisticated as other places because of our sports choices. A natural rebuttal is that soccer is only the most popular sport because it's easy to play and accessible to everyone and it's true. I don't even like hockey but do you think it's realistic for people around the world to grow up playing it? It's not even realistic to play for much of United States because you need:
1. A ton of expensive equipment or at least a stick
2. Either a cold environment or access to a hockey rink
3. Preferably, you'd also need people to practice against, especially a goalie
Most places I know don't have cold weather and even if there are rinks, they are few and far between. The chances of a pickup game of hockey with skates breaking out around here is about as good as me winning the lottery or being struck by lightening.
Sure, you can even have poor people make the best use of their means and play hockey where they are but it's a much bigger hassle than soccer, basketball or even baseball, thus why those are the most popular games around the world.
No talk about today's "thrilling" 1-1 PK win by Germany?
I didn't watch live, obviously, but I'm sure it was bad.
After 120 minutes of virtual deadlock (hey, they actually scored, I'll give both of them that), they went to Penaldos. After both teams made an excellent percentage of 40% of their first 5 kicks that a 12-year old girl could make (I'm not really exaggerrating IMO), both made their next three before Germany pulled through by stopping Italy once.
Even today's NBA () can't sink to this level. I'd rather watch a Sixers-Lakers game tbh.
I'm not even trying to troll the soccer crew here, but as I've said, soccer's core design really is stuck in the 1800s. And it's not about placating the American sensibility of "we want more scoring." All the other major sports on the planet from Rugby to AFL to Cricket to Hurling have a scoring structure and design that produces the punch/counterpunch and comeback factor I always talk about that is essential to sports. It's not even about creating drama, and more about creating more compelling situations from a tactical/strategic perspective.After 120 minutes of virtual deadlock (hey, they actually scored, I'll give both of them that), they went to Penaldos. After both teams made an excellent percentage of 40% of their first 5 kicks a 12 year old girl could make (I'm not really exaggerrating IMO), both made their next three before Germany pulled through by stopping Italy once.
Even today's NBA (
I understand soccer is all about "anticipation." But other sports do the anticipation dynamic just as well soccer (Baseball: "Can he bring the man home to tie it up or hit a homerun to take the lead?" Football: "Can we stop this 3rd and 2 situation?") in addition to having more variable scoring.
To not turn this thread into another pissing contest. I don't hate soccer as much as I've let on, and when I do watch it, it's more to appreciate the skill factor (I always love a good airborne crossfield pass that lands on a dime. And we all love nutmegs and bicycle kicks) than to "get into the game." A 1-0 lead often times feels like a 30 point lead in the NBA. And there's A LOT of 1-0 games in soccer.
Take the most common final score, for example. In 188,060 league games,2 the final tally was most often 1-0, proof, for Curley, that soccer was as low-scoring as he suspected. This result has occurred in more than 30,000 games — 16 percent of the total. Other common scores: 2-1 (about 27,000 games), 2-0 (about 22,000) and 1-1 (about 22,000).
As I said, I understand the idea of poachers sucking the life out of the game but on the other hand, offsides sucks the life out of the game and all but eliminates the soccer equivalent of the basketball fast break. I said it earlier, I'll say it again, imagine if basketball made it illegal to throw an outlet pass to an open player down court. That's one thing offsides often takes away.
Soccer's backers are worse than the Fiddler on the Roof, they're all about their traditions.
Actually at the start soccer didn't have subs at all. Your player broke a leg? though , i guess you're playing with only 10 guys the rest of the game. The subs are were meant for injuries only, not so much for tactical changes. Even as late as 90s you only had 2 subs + 1 one special sub only for goalie. Of course teams are "abusing" the sub system, but i really can't imagine how unlimited subs would work. You would probably have to get way thougher with yellow cards. Maybe a yellow card and you're out of the game, but your team can replace you, and the red card you're out of the game and your team is a player down?
The offside is ok as it is. You want to encourage the D to get out there. If you make it too easy to break the offside trap, the coaches will insist for D players to hang back at the back, leaving the attack with less players to work with and that only makes for a more boring game.
I don't think you can possibly make soccer more boring than it already is.
I don't demand change, though. If the rest of the world loves it the way it is, live and let live. I just take issue when soccer fans think any American who doesn't like soccer dislikes it out of ignorance, American patriotism, hatred of foreigners, etc.
My issue with soccer has nothing to do with it not being an "American game," but most soccer fans reflexively think that's why Americans don't like it, when in fact most Americans can articulate their problem with it.
So football is not a sport? Guess they don't count as athletes either.Cuba the best Stickball playing country in the world
Not that great of an accomplishment bc there's only like 4 countries
Cuba, Puerto Rico, Us of Gay, Japan
Communist ball
If a game isn't on the Olympics, is it even a sport?
Probably the most tactically sophisticated sport in the world, tbh...hence the abundance of draws and close scores even in mismatches....
400 pound men can play that game. Not a sport, tbh.
It's not as easy as just kicking the ball everywhere but come on, hockey requires more hand-eye coordination and strategy. The goal is much smaller and penalty shots are far, far harder in hockey than in soccer. And while an average person can't just walk on the pitch and dominate, soccer is very easy to learn and excel at, at least compared to other sports. You don't need any size or strength except maybe as a goalie unlike in football or basketball where you can be at a compeitive disadvantage without it. Today's NBA may be a joke but you still need to play the chess match and makes adjustments.
Last edited by Caltex2; 07-04-2016 at 02:37 AM.
Impossible to quantify. But I would say it has more to do with the massive field size and the difficulty of being accurate kicking something.
So many soccer games would have baseball like 7-5 scores and such if the players could finish more consistently. The defense gets beat a lot only for the player to flub an open chance.
Defensive tactics, to me, are also relatively simplistic compared to a sport like basketball. It's why minnow countries can have a puncher's chance against powerhouse because parking-the-bus is such an effective, yet simple to employ, gameplan. The primary reason I say basketball defense is more sophisticated is because it has to be by design, since basketball is an explosive offensive game that produces 100s more offensive chances than soccer. On the flip side, you can say offensive tactics have more depth that basketball because it's harder to create chances.
I know a soccer fan will come here and tell me I don't get it or whatever, but we can say that for all sports when having these pissing contests.
"American football is simple. They just hand it off a fast guy!"
"You don't get it."
Rinse/repeat.
Point is, all major sports will have a similar amount of "depth," because humans are great at turning simple things into complex things.
As soon as you ger your Tiger Woods in soccer you will all start watching. And when you all start watching you will really get it, and when you really get it you will be "ooooh, now I get it".
'cause that's the problem son. You can state all your problems with soccer on a well articulated way but we true soccer fans read what you are saying and think "meh, this guy thinks he knows the sport but he doesn't really get it" and no matter how much you think you do, you really don't.
If you ever start following it with a passion you will start to understand all the little things that makes this sport so good. You will start noticing the formation shifts. You will see if a team is man marking or playing zone. If it's pressing on zone 3, 2 or 1. When a wing is playing as a forward or as a midfielder. When the holding midfielder has to become a third central defender. And a bunch of other stuff that keeps us true fans hooked while casual fans just see a ball being kicked around.
Last edited by DAF86; 07-03-2016 at 11:16 PM.
None of that so-called "tactical depth" impresses me when I've been watching the NFL for over 20 years. Sorry. But soccer is not as strategically or tactically as interesting as the NFL.
Also, you're under the impression that "getting it" will automatically translate into fandom. I "get" plenty of things I don't necessarily like.
I can write you a 100 page dissertation on the strategy and tactics of baseball (baseball has, by far, the most complex roster building challenge of out any major sport in the world. And the pitcher/batter matchup is like a mini-chess match in real time), and you'll never come around because you simply don't like the game's flow or aesthetics. End of the day, you need to see people running around to be entertained. End of the day for me, I need to see a punch/counterpunch and "shootout" dynamic to be entertained.
Not everyone has to be a fan of the "World's Game."
Dude, you don't get it. If you could see yourself through my eyes you would get just how much you don't get it.
And son, I'm in advantage against you 'cause I do like, and know, the NFL. And believe it or not I followed basseball for some time there. The thought of baseball being a complex game is just insulting. Please stop insulting my intelligence.
"The you just don't get it defense."Dude, you don't get it. If you could see yourself through my eyes you would get just how much you don't get it.
And son, I'm in advantage against you 'cause I do like, and know, the NFL. And believe it or not I followed basseball for some time there. The thought of baseball being a complex game is just insulting. Please stop insulting my intelligence.
On cue.
As for baseball not being complex, go buy a general manager simulation like OOTP baseball, and build a team. You'll finish last in the standings every time. Go buy a basketball GM sim, and you can win the le with your eyes closed. (I also seriously doubt you "followed" baseball with any degree of seriousness. Probably just watched a few games and since there wasn't enough running around to keep your "intelligence" occupied, you quickly gave up.)
"But the players are constantly shifting formations and employing defensive zones."
Wow. Mind blown.
Again, no one raised on American sports is going to be bowled over by soccer's "tactics."
I would bet you my house that if you were to see a soccer game of some random teams you could watch the entire game and you wouldn't be able to tell me what formation each team used. Or what position each player is playing."The you just don't get it defense."
On cue.
As for baseball not being complex, go buy a general manager simulation like OOTP baseball, and build a team. You'll finish last in the standings every time. Go buy a basketball GM sim, and you can win the le with your eyes closed. (I also seriously doubt you "followed" baseball with any degree of seriousness. Probably just watched a few games and since there wasn't enough running around to keep your "intelligence" occupied, you quickly gave up.)
"But the players are constantly shifting formations and employing defensive zones."
Wow. Mind blown.
Again, no one raised on American sports is going to be bowled over by soccer's "tactics."
I, on the other hand, can tell you in just seconds what type of formation an NFL team is going to use in any given play. And basseball, well, that game is so complex that formation changes aren't even an option (except when they all shift a little to the right, or a little to the left depending if they're facing a right handed or left handed power hitter. Oh, oh, I was forgetting, a little to the back, or a little to the front too.)
You're probably right, but you miss the point I'm making that there is nothing particularly complex about formation shifts, zones, employing tactics that create crossmatches and employing tactics to counter those tactics.I would bet you my house that if you were to see a soccer game of some random teams you could watch the entire game and you wouldn't be able to tell me what fotmation each team used.
I, on the other hand, can tell you in just seconds what type of formation an NFL team is going to use in any given play. And basseball, well, that game is so complex that formation changes aren't even an option (except when they all shift a little to the right, or a little to the left depending if they're facing a right handed or left handed power hitter. Oh, oh, I was forgetting, a little to the back, or a little to the front too.)
I also think every sports fan in the world overrates the "complexity" of their favorite sport and sports in general. Tactics are relatively simple to design and employ. Even Pop said, "We know what every team is going to do and they know what we're going to do. It's who executes better than wins." End of the day, skill wins out.
As for baseball, you're confusing strategy with tactics. Baseball's complexity isn't necessarily out there in the open field, but the matchup between the pitcher-and-batter. The count alone can dramatically change what pitch the pitcher is going to throw, where he is going to locate it, how he'll deceptively use arm speed, and the batter has to devise a counterstrategy here and predict what the pitcher will do, meaning drawing on the dozens to hundreds of at bats he had against this particular pitcher and all the hours of film he watched on this pitcher. And when the count changes again, he'll have to completely reset and do it all it over again.
You just see one guy throwing hard and another swinging. There's a whole science behind both hitting and pitching.
But that said, the real complexity of baseball comes from roster building. There's no signing a couple of hotshot free agents and then easily making the playoffs next season, like in basketball. No simply pairing Messi with Xavi and Iniesta and dominating the Spanish League.
And in addition to building your primary team's roster, you have to make sure your 3 feeder farm teams are equally as well built to keep feeding the main team prospects. There's no drafting a Tim Duncan here and being essentially guaranteed a decade of playoff appearances.
This is why Ivy League grads run baseball FOs and morons like Mitch Kupchak are well paid NBA GMs.
http://www.dailynews.com/sports/2015...0-ivy-leaguers
Too late down here to get in another one of those back and forths arguments. I'm just gonna say that you are wrong if you think just throwing money at talented folks guarantees you success in soccer. You still have to account for chemistry and roster balance to make it all work, just like in any other sport. I don't know why you are making it seem like baseball is so special in this regard when its winningest franchise ever is the Yankees who are famously known for being the biggest money throwing franchise in the history of sports. They just sign the other team's best players and accomplish success at a higher rate than any other franchise in basseball.
Basseball can have its level of complexity, but it just doesn't match up with the level of cpmplexity of other sports, tbh.
The advent of sabermetrics changed all that. And besides, you have to remember that the Yankees have played in 112 MLB seasons. World series win rate: 24%. Boston Celtics NBA le win rate: 26%. Real Madrid le Win Rate: 37%. And 24 times they finished runner up
And see here.Baseball has the most parity of American sports, despite no salary cap.
Last edited by midnightpulp; 07-04-2016 at 12:34 AM.
Soccer is already more popular in America than hockey. More people watched the Copa than the Stanley Cup finals.
Also midnightpulp
there's a little rain, let's postpone this 10 hour game
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
