<p>I think it’s quite funny that so many Americans object to a game being decided by PKs when the shootout in the NHL was added to make the game more attractive to American audiences. And yes, I realize that the Stanley Cup is not decided by a shootout, but many here seem to dislike the PK system in general.</p>
<p>mootmom, yes, a baseball game can go on forever, but the same ten players haven’t been running virtually non-stop for 90 minutes. Not really a true comparison.</p>
<p>Resorting to a point system, as is used in youth tournaments to determine standing after the initial rounds of the tournament, would be even more controversial, and disheartening to some, than using the PK. Having had four Ds play soccer, and having spent thousands of hours at the side of a soccer pitch in the past 20 years, I can say that winning/losing by Golden Goal isn’t any better than by PKs.</p>
<p>The theatrics displayed by some players on the field are another issue entirely, and FIFA is, indeed, looking at this issue and how to eliminate it.</p>
<p>“Do you disagree meaning that you would not want the rules changed or are you disagreeing with the premise that rules changes are required before soccer has any chance of attracting mass American audiences? If the later, I think you are wrong. I remember co-workers claiming that soccer would overtake football and baseball as American pastimes based upon the huge popularity of youth soccer. The claim was that as these kids grew up they would all want to watch soccer. Well, those “kids” are now in their 40’s and soccer is less of a national pastime now than it was then (back then, at least the US had attracted Pele to come play in the States.)”</p>
<p>FF, where do you get your information to declare that soccer is less now than then? Do you base that on TV revenues, TV audiences, public attendance, or youth players participation? </p>
<p>Basing yourself on what shows up on TV might be misleading. For instance, the US Women team won a World Cup in front of a sell-out Rose Bowl and a vast -very vast- TV audience. Yet, their efforts in the previous Olympics were barely mentioned while TV viewers had to watch a meaningless Gymnastics’ event. On this issue, did you see any differences between the past Winter Olympics in the prior one? </p>
<p>How many marathons can you see life on US television? Should they change the format in ten small races of 2.6 miles with the winner decided by style in addition of speed? </p>
<p>Lastly, did you tune in to watch the Tour De France in 2006 without Lance Armstrong? US TV audiences are spoiled with choices, and smaller TV representation does not mean a sport is not popular. </p>
<p>PS Obviously, I do not believe that thr rules of soccer should be changed, because I don’t believe that it would make any difference. People in the US will watch the game when our team wins, and yawn when we lose. We are simply not interested in games where the term World Champion means something, and we can’t dominate. Let’s see how long baseball and basketball will remain at the apex when the games will be played by a majority of foreigners. If you doubt that the NBA is worried about it, just ask yourself why it is so damn willing to influence games to create new Michael Jordan’s in the form of Lebron or Wade, and this at ALL COST.</p>
<p>In terms of popularity, I don’t quite see what exactly the problem is here: certainly America has cornered a significant market share and is profiting big time from soccer even if it might seem like this sport is not big league compared to baseball. Abroad, a great deal of soccer’s popularity has to do with fan club promotion and team loyalty - these days Real Madrid is known by many as Real Madrid.com. The U.S. based Nike is “going guerilla” to create brand loyalty for its soccer products and is giving Adidas a good run for its money.</p>
<p>Since “The World Cups global TV and Web audience is bigger than the Olympics’ or the Super Bowls’ - 28 billion in-home viewers world-wide.” </p>
<p>Supposedly, the trash talk from Matterazzi was racial–and there is a racial back story to the French 2006 Cup experience. No excuse for the headbutting but a window into the level of tension.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Zidane is French-Algerian
</p>
<p>In the days following Zidan’es 1998 World Cup celebration…
<p>FF, hockey is very popular in the markets in which it exists. Fans are rabid in hockey cities, and have been for decades. The 'Canes fans in NC being a good example during this year’s Stanley Cup. Contrary to popular belief, something can indeed be popular without having huge tv revenues. In most cities, games are televised for local fans. It’s only here in Canada that games are broadcast on national networks and not city-specific.</p>
<p>Thanks for posting this story. It was, as I suspected, a racial insult that got to Zidane. And I’m sure it was a very calculated one. These guys know one another’s weak points. I’m still sad that he lost his cool, though.</p>
<p>xiggi, my perception of soccer being less popular in the US now than in the mid to late 70s is based on “buzz”. Back then, common people (i.e., not those who were brought up on the nuances of soccer) would occasionally talk about and actually go to soccer matches - mostly to see Pele. The sports reports on TV would regularly cover them. Now, I just had to look up whether the NY area even had a soccer team. It turns out we do. The Red Bull??? Certainly not a name that I have ever heard of in the papers or on TV sports reports. </p>
<p>I’m sure they must attract some fans, but nothing like what was predicted (or hoped for) 30 years ago.</p>
<p>
I’m not so sure of that. The US populace is quite involved with many Olympic sports in which we do not dominate. One of the most popular Winter Olympic sports is downhill ski-racing and the US is certainly not dominant in them. One of the most popular and memorable sporting events of all time was the US vs Soviet Union hockey match in Lake Placid - even though we had absolutely “zero” chance of winning that much less dominating it. Another apparently popular Olympic sport (but not with me) is figure skating. Except for an occasional win in the men’s or women’s singles events, I would hardly say that the US dominates. Tennis is quite popular in the US and we far from dominate in it.</p>
<p>My H still plays soccer, (yeah I know) Anyway, after almost 45 years of playing, he never once got a red card, at all levels of play, even semi pro</p>
<p>last year, this really obnoxious guy was pushing H, calling names, trying to take him down, and my H kept his cool…it wasn’t until he called him a very derogatory name for the Irish that my H lost it…he turned around and kicked him in the behind…very blatant foul, from a very peaceful man…but it was the last straw</p>
<p>It is unfortunate, but after a day and a lifetime of torment, I can kind of understand it</p>
<p>What is great about soccer is that it takes one ball, that is it, and almost any surface, almost any size 'field", barefoot, any number of players, and that is all you need to get a game going- the goals…couple of sweatshirts on the ground, you can play in shorts, sweats, skirts, whatever…when we go back to Ireland, if some little kids are playing, my H or Ds can join them and pass the ball around, not every part of soccer is competition, every vacation we go on my H can find a kick around game and just join in, language is never a barrior,nor is age, old guys can play with 10 year olds, skill balances speed, it can be on the beach, or a parking lot…</p>
<p>that is why it is so popular in the world- the poorest of the poor can play, and they don’t need fancy equipment, not even shoes, to play</p>
<p>THe best players started on the streets and didn’t need coaches from the age of 5</p>
<p>You don’t have to be tall, or big, or skinny, or giant, you can just be a little boy or girl with desire</p>
<p>Well, maybe in some areas. However, I live in the NY area which has 3 teams and I still don’t recall games being regularly telecast. Yes, the fans that go to the games may indeed be rabid, but that doesn’t necessarily translate into being a generally “popular” sport. A popular sport by definition (mine at least) should have sufficient following to be televised on a regular basis.</p>
<p>Fifa is being hypocrits…they need to come out STRONGLY against the Italian player…vehemently denounce his words, as should the Italian coach…never will happen, but their “victory” is dirty and tarnished, they played dirty and “won” in shame</p>
<p>I don’t buy the argument that unless they change the rules in order to end the game differently or so that there are higher scoring games, that Americans won’t be into soccer. Look at baseball and how it can go on for hours with virtually NO action! If that isn’t boring, nothing is! If a shutout or no-hitter is wonderful and exciting in baseball, then a 0-0 result in soccer should be even more exciting, since there is more action.</p>
<p>I dont like shootouts from the perspective of a mom whose daughter has been playing soccer for 6 years, but because of a lot of things, this past year was the first time she ever kicked in a goal.
This was amazing & she did it against the top team in their division. ( deciding point)
THe next game she kicked in another goal.
This gave her so much confidence that the next two games that were decided by a shootout, she stepped up to do a penalty kick.
Unfortunately, she didnt make a goal in either game.
So that is why I don’t like them- because I hate to see her up there with everyone watching her- although obviously she has made great strides and wanted to do it.</p>
<p>FF, while it makes little sense to argue our mutual perceptions, I believe a few of your examples might be revisited. </p>
<p>Regarding downhill skiing, did you miss the Time magazine cover of Bode Miller and all the hoopla because he failed to win … several gold medals? A few weeks before the Olympics, it seems fans were ready to crown Bode the new king of the universe. </p>
<p>Ice skating? Are we NOT disappointed when an american does not finish with gold? Well, you could be talking about ice dancing, but that is another story. </p>
<p>Tennis? Athletes come and go, but are the records of the Williams sisters and Pete Sampras that far removed? How long ago was it that Davenport was number 1 in the world? </p>
<p>Anyhow, the US sports market is what it is: a market dominated by the possibilities of selling more and ever more expensive advertising slots. There are games that lend themselves better to multiple interruptions, and soccer is simply not one of them. It is also a sport that begs for a cast of great announcers who know soccer and … can speak. One can appreciate how much we are lacking in this area whenever a coverage on Fox Sports Network loses the British audio and the studio has to switch to one of the studio announcers. Games from Argentina, Italy, France or Germany lose 90% of their appeal because they cannot use locals.</p>