Why does a large percentage of Americans enjoy watching and playing football but refuse to acknowledge its twin sport? Why is it that many homes have basketball hoops on their yard or garage but no soccer posts? Why is it this happening? Soccer is an honorable and physically challenging sport. It can challenge even the healthiest man, what with running for forty-five minutes without a rest. There are no time outs in soccer. Inside the soccer field, there is no one but you, the goalkeeper and the goal post. So why is soccer not included in the American’s list of priority sports? The Best Sport in the World In basketball, it would be very easy to earn a point. Just raise your armpits and then try your luck with the hoop. That is the reason why a game could end after four quarters with more than a hundred points for each team. With a gifted shooter and a good offense and defense strategy, your team could win effortlessly. However, in soccer, every point is crucial. A game could even end with no score for both teams. The goals are all well deserved and planned so no one can say that it was just a lucky shot. The teams play together and practice perfect teamwork because each goal needs cooperation, and a team with no cooperation does not and can not win. How can you exchange basketball for soccer? Basketball makes it easy to win – soccer makes you work hard for it. It is like picking between a cat and a dog. A cat will make you work for its attention and love; a dog will love you regardless of who you are. Basketball is the dog – and soccer is the cat.
Basketball is a lot easier to set up then soccer. You really only need a hoop and a ball, and a hoop can go anywhere, such as above a garage door or on the side of a barn. You also don't need as many people to play. Basketball is great as a one-on-one sport. American football is more exciting to watch than soccer, IMO, because every play has lots of hits. Soccer is no match for American football in brutality. The constant stoppage of play actually makes football more exciting, because the players are going all-out on every play. I can't stand watching the end of a soccer game when all the players are tired and everything is moving at about 50% speed. Soccer's twin isn't American football, which is more similar to rugby. I'd say hockey is more of a twin to soccer. It's arena soccer on ice. Americans like hockey more than soccer, mostly due to the violence involved with hockey. Still, hockey is not nearly as popular as football, basketball, and baseball because it lacks the scoring action or constant big hits. Americans are not patient enough to watch players pass back and forth to each other in the hopes of opening up a scoring chance.
I have no arguments with the main thrust of your post; other than to say that if someone doesn't like association football then really that's fair enough. Different strokes and all that. However the bit I've quoted is rubbish. Firstly there are no 'points' in the game of association football and secondly lucky goals are scored all the time! I got one myself last night! Also you don't need 'soccer posts' at home in order to play association football. Everyone in Britain is familiar with the concept of 'jumpers for goalposts', or even just kicking a ball around or playing 'donkey'. Actually you don't even need a proper ball, Pele grew up kicking a 'ball' made of old socks and poorer Africans still play with rag 'balls'. However I really do think it's a cultural thing rather than an equipment thing. Americans seem to like sports where every match should have a winner and a loser. The idea of two teams fighting out an honourable draw seems unpalatable so a number of different 'overtime' devices seem to be employed to manufacture a winner. Association football does use a tie-breaker in knock-out tournaments (penalty shoot-outs) but we all hate it - we'd rather the matches were re-played until a winner emerges naturally. The other thing is anybody who has watched association football will tell you that they have seen great matches that ended 0-0. I think that's another thing that Americans find hard to understand; how can you watch a game that not only ended up as a tie - but where there was not a single score all match! All I can say is that it's the sheer difficulty of scoring that makes association football attractive. I personally can't stand basketball where the points flow like diarrhoea, to me it all seems so cheap whereas when your team score in assocation football you REALLY celebrate. Goals are precious. However, as I say, different strokes. Now try and get your heads around cricket where there are FOUR possible results!
I don't think there's anything controversial about it. Most Americans simply aren't exposed to soccer; it's not that they don't like it. I played soccer for around 12 years before I finally destroyed my ankle and had to quit at the time. I wasn't great at it, but I loved it and still do. I'd love to get back into it, but there just aren't many adult leagues or fields where we can play freely (even schools aren't that close with everything so sprawled out where I live). It's just not an option. If it were, you'd see more of us playing it and watching it. I remember when I was growing up, it wasn't a huge sport, but it was the fastest growing sport here in the US. I'm not sure where it stands now, but it wouldn't surprise me if it still is... but growth takes time. Heck, my area was only finally introducing girls' soccer at all when I was a junior or senior in high school... and it was wildly popular once it was introduced (they did a lot of active recruiting, trying to pull girls from the lacrosse, field hockey, and rugby teams depending on the school). The fact of the matter is that organizations within the sport simply don't do enough to publicize it here in the US, so there's really no one to blame but them. You can't blame people for their preferences if they're not equally exposed to other options.
Both game are the same, it won by the one who scored more. Easier to score doesn't mean easy to win...what kind of logic is that.... A soccer player spend half of the time standing and watching, but a basketball player run full court @ full speed the whole time. Soccer is so easy to play, as long as you don't use your hand, go offside or hit someone intentionally, no foul will be called. However, basketball has tons of rules and you have to be careful all the time. there aren't many plays in soccer, you stand at your post and kick when the ball go near you. basketball has so many play, it is a far more complicated game than soccer. Many people think American football is a stupid game where people just throw their body around. However, there are so many plays they need to remember and master, decision making is also crucial cause a split second can make a huge different. It is not a easy game. have you ever play a game of basketball?
I'm sorry, but your analysis of s*ccer is the biggest load of rubbish I've ever read on the subject. Every statement you've made about it is wrong.
The MLS needs a lot more good/great players for soccer to be popularized there. Beckham alone is not enough.
I disagree with your statement. In football every player is running around for 90 minutes, apart from the goalkeeper. Ok they might not be doing it full speed but they are always on the go. That in itself makes football a hrad game to play. Football is a lot harder to play than most people think. There is more skill involved in football than a lot of people think. Staying onside and not being caught offside is one of the hardest parts of a football match. Like I said football is a game of skill and to some extent luck. Your first sentence makes me laugh. You obviously have never witnessed a professional football match otherwise you would know that a lot of goals from football come from the buold up play. Players making runs and getting the ball played through to them. Overall your opinion on football is humorous but thats what it is an opinion. I disagree with your statement. In football every player is running around for 90 minutes, apart from the goalkeeper. Ok they might not be doing it full speed but they are always on the go. That in itself makes football a hrad game to play.
I'm beginning to see a lot more soccer fanatics than ever before. And yes, this includes posts in yards, whole fields even. And while I do live in an area vibrant in soccer, I have also noticed it especially on television. No longer are there that many empty seats in the stadium of an MLS game. 5 years ago, it was a pathetic site. Only 300 or so would come to see LA play NY. It is making a come back. Being a fan myself, this is great. We have a place near my house where there are literally like 50 fields. That one is so used that they are making another one on top of an old place that has about 30 fields. Its insane. Football will always remain bigger of course, but soccers time has come, as the Dick's Sporting Goods commercials say XD.
actually i yawned much more easily when i'm watching basketball games rather than soccer matches, hohum
We simply do not have the exposure to soccer. I do not know why you compare it to basketball. With so many baseball players from all over I don't understand why baseball isn't the premier world sport.
I'll watch the World Cup, thats about it for soccer though. But when I do watch the World Cup it does get very exciting when a team has the ball near the other teams goal, I find myself on the edge of my seat.
That's a very good question. I don't follow baseball but it seems to be, like association football, a simple game with a simple scoring system and not requiring much in the way of equipment and thus quite easy for beginners to start playing immediately. 'American' football and Rugby Union - whilst great sports - can be hard for outsiders to pick up. I've been following 'American' football since 1982 and whilst I would say I'm fairly knowlegable for a European I still learn things every season. I think there are two reasons why association football and not baseball is the world's sport. Firstly we got there first. Virtually every country that plays football has the same story - one day a load of British people turned up (military, traders or missionaires) and started kicking a ball around. The locals joined in (because it's easy to play) and it went on from there. That established the tradition. Secondly you don't need a big area or really any equipment. Football matches can take place in a street with a bundle of rags for a ball and goals chalked onto walls. Brazilians still play a street game based on a 'non-bouncy' ball. This inclusivity also made it popular as it was a game anybody could play at any level.