Tell me again how soccer's boring

[alcibiades_mystery]

[MineralMan]

1. OK. Soccer's Boring.

Pretty much all sports are boring, unless you're in the game. But, that's just me. Cheer on!

[AnArmyVeteran]

30. They need bigger nets so scores would be like basketball scores, 98-79 !!!

Soccer is painfully boring. Watching a little ball be kicked around for an hour and a half is grueling, especially when only 1 point is scored in all that time. The net needs to be made two or three times it's current size so scoring is easier. I'd like to see scores like 100-98 rather than suffer through 90 minutes of the hellish boredom of 1-0 games.

Another idea, put a bullseye in the middle of the net and the closer you got to the middle, the more points you would get. If you got a bullseye you could get 10 points.

I'd rather be in prison than be forced to watch soccer games non-stop all day, every day.

BTW, in case you can't tell, I'm not a fan of soccer...

[dmallind]

2. Will you listen?

[blondeatlast]

3. Can't, because it isn't. nt

[Enrique]

4. it's exciting for two seconds

two seconds out of every four hours of game time. So yeah it's not completely boring.

[elocs]

14. Agreed. That's a good description. Not completely boring, just mostly boring. n/t

[maxsolomon]

15. games are 90 minutes + stoppage.

average duration is 2 hours.

now, BASEBALL is boring, and things happen all the time.

[redqueen]

5. I love Landon Donovan.

Just wanted to say that.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

6. This

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noOHdTQd6H8

[EFerrari]

7. Oh, man. That was beautiful!

lol

[mmonk]

8. It's not. Americans like scoring to the point that you don't

have to watch a game, just the last the few minutes of a game. To me, when scoring is cheap, the game is boring. That's why I like hockey and soccer. A goal can be a game changer.

[Goblinmonger]

58. Exactly. Pro Basketball is a joke.

Just watch the last 5 minutes (or less) of the game. The rest is just set-up for I don't know what.

[Obamanaut]

9. As are golf, tennis, and any other 'sport' I don't like. nt

[HopeHoops]

10. Why, is there a game going on somewhere?

:shrug:

[AngryAmish]

11. Because luck is the driving factor in the game

That is how. The best team does not win with the regularity that is necessary for legitimate competition.

[mmonk]

12. Usually, over the period of time of a season or tournament,

they do.

[JackRiddler]

13. That is an absurd statement, unless you want to apply it to the other major sports.

[AngryAmish]

18. Basketball? 7 game series. Best team almost always wins.

Actually basketball is about the least random sports. Each individual possession is fairly random but in a game the ease of scoring allows the better team to be determined.

Baseball? More random. Among the Jamesians (of which I am a member) is has been determined that over a season the best team almost always wins the division. Then there is a tournament to determine a champion. The World Series winner is the best tournament team if not the best team (there is a distinction).

Football? This is a very hard statistical nut to crack. But Hank Stram was able to predict the Super Bowl winner with great regularity - and Troy Aikman is using his formula with similar results.

Boxing? Boxing betting is done on emotion and people who actually know the game usually win.

Golf? Look at the work Dave Pelz did in the 70s.

No, soccer with the infrequency of scoring does not allow for the smoothing out of randomness. If that is the way you like your sports, fine. It may be more exciting (Anyone can win! wheee!) but it makes for disappointing viewing for the Jamesians.

[alcibiades_mystery]

21. LOL

That's like saying that baseball is all luck because the Kansas City Royals beat the Red Sox one game in June. Soccer has the same consistency of winning teams as any other professional sport, as even a cursory examination of any professional football league in the world would tell you (or, indeed, World Cup winners).

I get it that you're being the 'Murkan Anti-Soccer Dude for the duration of the tournament and it's all very clever, but your argument this time is really tending into numbskull territory. You can be the Murkan Anti-Soccer Dude without making stupid arguments.

[JackRiddler]

23. No, actually.

"You can be the Murkan Anti-Soccer Dude without making stupid arguments."

That's untrue.

You can be the anti-spectator sports dude without making stupid arguments, though these will be irrelevant to everyone who's watching the sports.

You can be the general (no nation) anti-soccer guy who doesn't like it for one reason or another (though usually this is due to not having a clue about it).

But the very existence of the Murkan Anti-Soccer Dude is predicated on stupidity, or know-nothingism.

It's know-nothingism especially given that soccer is now the Number One school/club team sport in the United States, played by more people than any other. So it's not just "US against the world," ugly to see in any nation, but also an ignorant and wrong view of US. This is a soccer nation, more young people playing it than baseball or football.

[hughee99]

42. So you'd expect more interest in the professional soccer, but it isn't there.

In the US, children look up to the sports stars (regardless of whether they consider themselves role models or not). If Soccer were such an up and coming sport, you'd expect it's top players to be better known than top golfers, snowboarders, race car drivers (which almost NO ONE participates in) but kids can pick Tiger Woods, Shaun White, and Jeff Gordon out of a crowd and couldn't pick Landon Donovan out of his family photo. This being the case, how can you possibly consider this a "soccer nation".

I'm a Murkan, not-that-anti-Soccer Dude, but you're the one making the stupid argument here.

[gratuitous]

27. Except that's not what the post said

Yes, the Royals will occasionally break through and beat a Major League team. They do it about 40% of the time. Over the course of an entire season, however, they won't do it nearly often enough to qualify for the post-season, being eliminated from contention around Independence Day each year. Over a 162 game season, the best teams in Major League Baseball practically always qualify for the post-season. Every now and then a team will sneak in because of a weak division, and they may turn out to be a good tournament team and have a chance. But it's usually the best teams competing for the championship with a combination of offense, defense, pitching, strategy, and performance in the clutch.

Soccer? Please. One for instance: The teams as constituted that qualify for the World Cup often aren't the teams that actually play, due to the spotty availability of the best players because of their club obligations that supersede playing for their national team.

And that has nothing to do with being a 'Murkan Anti-Soccer Dude and everything to do with how the various sports are administered.

[alcibiades_mystery]

31. The post said

"The best team does not win with the regularity that is necessary for legitimate competition"

This is manifestly untrue of soccer at the league or tournament level. It's simple nonsense.

[Renew Deal]

35. That's just not true.

The World Cup is just a small sample of soccer in general. It's a super high pressure championship tournament. If you looked at the leagues, and even the World Cup, you'll see that the best teams tend to win.

[DefenseLawyer]

16. To each his own.

What is mind numbingly slow and plodding to me can be riveting to you. Then again, I'm pretty sure I have ADD. Don't judge me!

[Nye Bevan]

17. 0-0 ties are often boring

Especially in the later stages of the World Cup when the inferior team deliberately plays a boring defensive game in the hope of getting to a penalty shootout, which they feel they have a better chance of winning than the match itself.

That's one great thing about baseball. No tied games.

[Froward69]

19. Ill tell ya why...

A group of men or women running around kicking a ball... sometimes they actually knock each other down. even less time they score a goal.

more often than not one of those that got knocked down actually fell and then feigns injury. boo frickin hoo.

On edit/ ZzZzZzZzZz oh a beer, then more ZzZzZzZzZz
there is no such thing as a "Thrilling" 1-0 match... NOTHING

[JackRiddler]

25. Yeah, feigning injury is so terrible...

Nothing like the righteousness with which the manager storms out of the dugout to argue calls that have not been reversed in 110 years... Speaking of theater!

Or watching commercials for three minutes while the zebras contemplate whether a catch was fair, and a nation going into a rage for a week afterwards at the thought that a guy's shoetip may have been a millimeter past the plane of the foul line when his front cleats hit on the fair side.

All of these events incorporate theater and deception and unreliable law enforcement and litigation, they are equal parts show, war and sport.

[bdamomma]

20. I think golf is more boring.

World Cup is a big thing in other countries.

[Froward69]

22. At least Golf has terrain

and feigning injury is frowned upon.

[Dappleganger]

24. I've got hours and hours of video...

of our kids soccer games, beginning at the age of four (multiply that by four kids, that's LOT of soccer). Some of it is the funniest shit you'll ever see in a lifetime. I plan to use some of it as bribery one day. ;)

[SemiCharmedQuark]

26. I had all but given up hope....

I couldn't watch it this morning. I was following it on my phone and there was only 10 mins left in the game. I was driving my grandma back from the hospital when my husband called. W00t!

[yodermon]

28. It's a bad advertising-delivery mechanism, so ppl have been trained to think it's boring.

American football & baseball, have wonderful natural commercial break spots, so of course these are exciting, riveting games.
Soccer has no commercials so it is boring by definition .

[JonLP24]

43. I enjoy soccer

However. Football is the most exciting sport to me followed by Basketball. It's not because of the commercial breaks but the plays. I don't watch for the commercials on any sport. I understand they have commercials for timeouts and kickoffs and after punt and kick returns. It makes sense because commercials would probably be more attaining to watch than players standing around and I don't mind it. I concede soccer is more exiting to watch than baseball unless it's the Rockies or the Arizona State Sun Devils than I prefer to watch over soccer probably because I don't have one team to root for (except for USA in the World Cup by default)but I just want to see some drama. On edit-I forgot to add playoff baseball is very exciting especially if my team is involved. I even prefer to watch top golf tournaments over regular season baseball (not involving The Rock Show) especially before the All*Star break.

Point I'm making, is that I find soccer NOT boring but I also find American football exciting and riveting due to the game play and the strategy.

[itsrobert]

29. It's BORING!!!!

with a capital B and that rhymes with Flea.

[wilt the stilt]

32. I am one of the biggest soccer bashers

but I did see the end of the Algeria game and I even think that was exciting. I have to hand it to the players Algeria made one mistake and they put too many people on the offensive end and that resulted in the USA scoring on what was in essence a fast break.

That being said I have never heard a good argument why it is the only game that has to contort itself to get a winner. It's the only game that ends with less than the whole team on the field and that is it's fundamental flaw.

[Codeine]

33. "ends with less than the whole team on the field "

Red cards aren't the norm. And personally I find this a feature, not a bug -- it keeps players from being douchebags.

[wilt the stilt]

36. Shootouts

when you have to alter the end of the game in order to get a result then there is a fundamental flaw. All games should be won on the field with it's full allotment of players playing. Soccer is the only game I can think of that has to change the game in order to get a result.

[Codeine]

37. You simply can't always do that.

Make them keep playing much past the 90 minutes of regulation plus overtime and you're going to injure players to no end. No fan I know loves penalty kicks, but we all recognize their ultimate necessity.

Honestly, to say that a sport obsessed over by most of the planet is fundamentally flawed seems silly -- if people are happy with it, it's not a flaw.

[wilt the stilt]

38. Lot's of people like really shitty stuff

GW Bush, Milly Cyrus, The Osmonds, Reagan etc.
Popularity does not make something good.

if you can't decide the game on the field with it's full complement of players then there is something wrong in the design. Games are meant to be played and won on the field.

Anything else is a flaw.

[redqueen]

39. Football isn't shitty though. Not even a little bit.

It is the beautiful game... and I promise you that those shit things you mentioned are not beloved by an overwhelming number of people all over the world.

Everything is flawed... football is no exception. It is still the most popular sport in the world.

[wilt the stilt]

40. name another game that has to change the number

of people on the field to get a result.

[insanity]

51. That's kind of a bullshit line

The incentive is on teams and players to not be reckless and therefore keep all 11 men on the pitch. Red cards are not the norm. Name another sport where you have to be as physically gifted as top-level soccer players. Name another sport that has captured the attention of the world the same way. You think red cards and draws are fatal flaws, but I think endless substitutions are a flaw of basketball and that the pace of American football is so flawed that you only get 15 minutes on average of actual action per game. No game is perfect, and you may call one sports flaw a feature depending on how you see it. Acting like you're the arbiter of sports flaws when you clearly don't understand the sport in question is stupid.

[wilt the stilt]

53. well designed games are won and lost

on the field of play. Why don't we just have a one on one game of basketball to see who wins after two overtimes. Why not a home run derby after 12 innings of baseball. How about a putting contest after 3 sudden death playoff holes in golf. The U.S. open has a full 18 hole playoff to see who is the winner.

A well designed game has a logical means to an end without having to do gyrations to end it.
A poorly designed game has to make a ridiculous way to end the game which is not really the game. Explain to me how a shootout is the same as the game. Isn't soccer supposed to be a team game. where is the teamwork in a shootout?

[insanity]

54. I think well designed games have logical endings

American Football, for example, isn't really logical in using the sudden-death model.

Soccer, on the other hand, has to have some means to break a deadlock, and if you've gone 120 minutes without breaking a tie, then all the extra time in the world is only going to drag the game on and create unnecessary injuries. You have to understand that playing football at that level is one of the most draining things you can do to your body (and to do it a couple times a week, at that). Spot kicks are rarely the way matches are decided. The incentive is to score before the game goes down to penalties. It's just like hockey in that regard.

To sum up, the ending of tied soccer matches are the most logical choice for the sport.

[wilt the stilt]

55. you will notice I didn't put football

in my choices of well defined sports. You have answered your own question. the game of soccer will just drag on. To end a "world championship" with a shootout is ridiculous. If you can't win it on the field with a full team then it is flawed. The actual best thought out game is baseball. No clock means no stalling. You have to get 27 outs. All timed sports are prone to clock killing which inevitably is boring.

[Goblinmonger]

59. So you want a 3-day-tennis-match soccer game?

You won't have the same number of players on the field because they will have died from exhaustion.

[wilt the stilt]

61. anytime you have to alter the design of the game

to end it it is flawed. not one of you have made a logical argument. exhaustion an injury is not an argument.

[Goblinmonger]

63. But your argument just begs the question.

Why is it flawed because you have to alter the design? The only reasonable answer just leads us back to the beginning. The design of the game is that if there is not a winner after the overtime periods, then it goes to a shootout. THAT'S the design because they know that they could not have those players continue any longer. Just because you don't like that design doesn't mean it is flawed. The purity of Wimbledon that lead to a three-day match is flawed. It is ridiculous. And to say that it is any more "not flawed" or "not boring" to watch two guys not break the others serve for a day and a half is just silly. But that's what you are arguing for. A soccer match that could go for days. The game wasn't designed that way.

[wilt the stilt]

64. a game should be won on the field of play

with the full complement of players. Anything else is not "the game". where is the "teamwork" that soccer purists always talk about?

Based on your "design" why don't we have a one on one basketball"game" to end a game after 2 ot's. Based on your logic you could get injured or you may be exhausted.

simple question is the game 11 on 11 or is it 1 on 1?

[Goblinmonger]

65. But your analogy doesn't work

The rules of basketball and soccer are completely different. The game of basketball would have been designed differently if they played the entire game without significant stoppage and were only allowed a couple substitutions. The rigor and impact on the human body between basketball and soccer is not even close. That's why the game is designed the way it is.

If, after 2 OTs, there is no winner, then the design is to see who has the better goalie and strikers. It is both a game of teamwork and of individual skill. Saying that it has to be like basketball supposes that basketball is the standard for game design. Or some other game. Soccer is soccer.

[wilt the stilt]

67. Is the game

11 on 11 or is it 1 on 1? I say the game is 11 on 11. 1 on 1 is an aberration and it done only because soccer can't find a a way to end the game with all the people playing. All other games have figured out how to end the game on the field of play with baseball being the best thought out.

As I mentioned before baseball is always played in attack mode. It is unique in the fact there is no time limit. It is to the casual observer boring(of which I understand) but talk about a game that anyone can play regardless of size and shape. The only game that fat guys can play. One only needs either a great arm or great skill.

[JonLP24]

50. Hockey has shootouts in the regular season

after 1 overtime period.

You could argue college football changes the game in overtime but they do have all the players on the field but it is different.

However I do find the shootouts exciting. The MLS title was a good one, too bad I missed most of it watching the Bears-Eagles Monday Night Football game.

[wilt the stilt]

52. regular season

is the key phrase. When it gets to the title game they keep playing. It's a flaw. The game should be won and lost on the field with a full complement of players.

[jakeXT]

34. Gleese on soccer vs football

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sD_8prYOxo

[itsrobert]

41. The name is Cleese and he is a comedian

So you think that saying American Football sucks is going make people like soccer more?

[jakeXT]

44. Hit the wrong button, I watched this documentary recently and just posted a clip

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTI1MDA4NjI4.html first part, there should be more parts

[demoleft]

45. have a look at the 2009-2010 UEFA championship final and tell me if soccer is boring... ;) n/t

[Heywood J]

46. Ties. Scores like 0-1 for a 90 minute game. (NT)

[Codeine]

47. The score is just one element of the game.

Even in a one-nil win a ton of shit happens on the pitch. The goal is just a culmination of a strategy played out non-stop over the course of play.

[Heywood J]

48. I think we're different types of audiences.

It looks like we look for different types of things in a game. And that's a fair thing to have, but I just find it boring as hell to watch, even without the constant droning in the background.

[Codeine]

49. We can agree on the droning.

Vuvuzelas are idiotic. FIFA is idiotic for not banning them. The fans are idiotic for blowing them incessantly without pause or regard for the action on pitch.

[Goblinmonger]

60. So you don't like baseball? n/t

[many a good man]

56. ALMOST scoring is like extended foreplay

Lots of ALMOSTS get the heart racing. It makes that long awaited orgasm even more appealing.

Watching top talent is also a beautiful thing to see.

I love the fact there are no commercial breaks except for halftime. Its fun to watch with a group that are really into it. The ebb and flow of play is reflected in the emotions and sounds and movements of the audience. Its a huge communal experience.

[ProfessorGAC]

57. It Would Take Too Long

And it would equally tedious.
GAC

[El Supremo]

62. Can this thread please die?

It fucking boring. That's it.

[Onceuponalife]

66. Much like a soccer match, this thread is incredibly boring

with a very short moment of excitement. In the case of this thread that moment of excitement was the Simpsons video.