Thursday, July 27, 2006

World Cup Sucker


I've been meaning to post this for some time, but I haven't been able to pull myself away from the beer booth at the Peyote games long enough, or sober enough, to do so. To all two of my fans, not including my Dad, I apologize.

Every four years there's an event so grand, so riveting, that people paint themselves different colors, call in sick at work, and glue themselves to the nearest television. No, I'm not talking about the U.S. Presidential elections, I'm talking soccer.

Soccer, or football as most of the rest of the world calls it, holds its tournament of champions every four years in grand Olympic fashion. As Americans, one would think that we could sink our teeth into something like this. It's more than just a game, it's us against them! A real patriotic endeavor. It's the red, white, and blue against the mauve, silver, and kelly green, of some impoverished nation the size of New Hampshire.

What does soccer need to garner the attention and affection of the American sports fan? I've thought about this over the years as I've tried to give this sport a chance. I watched the World Cup when the U.S. hosted it in 1996. I tried MLS, but the team mascot names were too offensive, and I've even seen some high school games. Hell, I used to play the game as kid in school, but I still can't get into it.

For me, scoring is way too low. When I turn on and see a game, oh, wait, sorry, match, being played and it's zero to zero with three minutes left in the game, I thank myself for not having wasted my time for what has been, up to that point, nothing more than a game of catch with your feet. There's got to be more goals and more shots on goal. There are some aspects to the game that could be tweaked to give the sport a real boost on this side of the planet.

First, let's put 10 more players on the field for each team. That would be a total of 42 players on the field for both teams at one time. And second, since it would be ridiculous for them to only have one ball to play with let's chuck a second ball in play for good measure. Imagine the chaos as one team assaulted the opposing teams goal with two balls at once. It would be a Civil War re-enactors dream.

If one of the opposing players accidenatlly kicks the ball into the goal he is defending, your team should get two points. It's the ultimate "salt in the wound" punishment for making that mistake. And hey, it beats the execution by your fellow countrymen that's waiting for you when you get home.

"Side bar, your honor!" Asylum in the United States should be offered to anyone who scores a goal accidentally for the other team. I mean the Hussein boys in Iraq are dead, but I'm more than sure there's a mullah somewhere who could find the passage in the Koran that says you should die for your slip of the foot. In the more moderate countries(read: Non-Islamic states), you might still have to contend with the, "you broke up Pantera, and thus ruined my life, so you must die," mentality, so it could be a life or death rule for some players.

Everyone must agree that the time on the clock is the time left in the game. Or at least that's how it works in the rest of the timed sports world. Though, it is kind of dramatic going through the extra, referee kept time at the end of the game, it seems so arbitrary and subject to tomfoolery. You could see a scenario where a referee who hails from Israel might fudge the time if he sees the Syrian squad moving up to possibly score and win against the Brits.

And where did that idea come from anyway? I thought about it and came to the conclusion that since most stadiums in the fourth world, where this sport is so popular ,have nothing more than a sun dial available to keep time. Although I'm not ready to get out to the Tashkent Municipal Sports Complex and Gallows to find out. Talk about cheap seats.

I must address the overtime/penalty shot thing. How ridiculous is this? You bust your ass for a little over 1/1oth of a day only to rely on some guy trying to kick a ball into a goal to win at the last second...oooooh, wait, that's American football too. Well, let's at least concede that when it comes to overtime, sudden death, no pun intended North Korean team, would probably be better.

Finally, I don't believe soccer has the subtle brutality we Americans are used to. Take the head butt heard round the world commited by the infamous French football hero, Zinedine "Zizou" Zidane. Fine, you lost your head and put one on that pretty boy Materazzi, good for you. You deal with the red card, the bad press, and the fact that up until that moment you were a mythical soccer god in the Land of Wine and Cheese who was finishing his career playing for his country in the title game of the World Cup. Cest la vie!

Now, and until the end of time, you will always be remembered as a spoiled goon who blew a gasket in the waning moments of the last match of his life. What you missed going through, and what really bothered me more than what you did was that none of the other Italian players came over and stomped your guts out. I sat, stunned that the first Italian teammate on the scene, didn't run to help his felled comrade, and didn't crack Zidane in the chops, no. He ran straight to the referee to whine. For a fleeting moment, I thought that maybe he was going to pull the old WWE style, "distract the ref," while the Italian team's enforcer gave Zidane the business, but I was disappointed.

This sports fan was dismayed to see that instead of seeing red blood poor from his justly tweaked nose, the only red Zidane saw was a little card waved in his face as he was dispatched to the showers. I've always been a believer in standing up for your teammates, especially when he's the victim of a cheap shot.

You still see cheap shot stuff in U.S. sport. But cheapshots and cheapshot artists are dealt with, "on the field." Look at hockey. Man, half of it is based on fighting and intimidation. Now, I'm not talking about two guys who look each other in the eye and mutally get it on. That's not cheap shotin', that's a fight. Both guys wanted it and both of them got it. Enforcing, or goonery, as it might be called, has it's place in sport. Right or wrong, it's the way of things and I believe, keeps the cheap shoters in check.

Remember me, four years from now when the next World Cup cranks up and FIFA hasn't implemented any of these changes. Think about how good it could have been. Instead we get to see the same old, 0 to 0 tie games, faking it when you get knocked over, hooligan riots, and Euro snobbery that this sport has given the world.

GO BANGLEDESH!

3 Comments:

Blogger denise said...

I consider myself an off/on sports fan, and every so often, I can sit down and enjoy a good soccer game. It's not nearly as entertaining as American football proper, but it'll do.

I also consider myself an unapologetic liberal Democrat that likes guns, gays and more often than not, God.

Give me a sec...I'll tie the two together, I promise.

There's a website called Campus Progress (dot org) that i visit a couple of times a week to check out writings from college students deeply entrenched in political blogging. During the world cup, there was debate about the political implications of supporting the United States in the competition.

His argument:
The core progressive principle of meritocracy compels us to root for other teams if they’re really so much better than we are — and America’s performance in this World Cup shows that there are plenty of these teams out there. Progressives believe that people should attain success based on their individual talents, efforts, and performance on as even a playing field as possible. Of course, when it comes to sports, this sort of equal chance at success exists only in theory — it’s a simple economic truth that rich countries have more money to devote to training their soccer teams, while poor countries have much less. Simply put, soccer points to the real poverty millions around the world must cope with daily.

I wanted to get your take on the argument. I think it's f*ckin' ridiculous. Call me naive, but I'm still a firm believer in American exceptionalism.

There. The end.

3:38 PM  
Blogger Powerslave105 said...

Well, where do I begin?

World wide, there's always going to be a disdain for the U.S., because of our exceptionalism.

If it came down to economics, the U.S. would probably never lose a World Cup. The problem we have here is that the really talented athletes are drawn to the big three sports, football, baseball, and basketball, because of its cultural and monetary appeal.

I know a high school student who was a player of the big three, who told me that when he showed interest in soccer, the head football coach discouraged him from playing. Something about, "Leave it to the Mexicans."
That was a few counties north of here, but I think that attitude is prevalent everywhere.

I guess my point is, and I think you'd agree, that if the U.S. were able to send forth its best athletes we'd never lose.

Funny thing. I consider myself a conservative who likes guns, gays, and not very often, God. Strange, huh?

See ya around the blog!

8:24 PM  
Blogger Junkbox said...

Look at how well the US did in the Basketball World Championship.

Too much razzle dazzle, not nuff funda-Menta's!!!

No shizzle for dis'dizzle!

5:07 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home