<p>The beauty of Soccer Made in Germany is the high-speed surprise attack.
What’s a demonstration today!</p>
<p>American soccer popularity does not have the advantage that the NBA and the NFL enjoy: TV commercials. ESPN and ABC don’t have American soccer reporters and they have to pay the British commentators.</p>
<p>If the soccer game time is divided into 6 quarters and each team has 4 timeouts per half game then I am sure that the US will beat other countries in the World Cup.</p>
<p>I was not thinking England would win, but the goal that wasn’t really did change the mindset of both teams. Up next, A/M. This should be easy for Argentina, but we’ll see. The Mexicans are very hopeful.</p>
<p>I want to see the Mexico team to have the chance too. But on the other hand I would love to see the beautiful plays from Argentina. Let’s wait and see.</p>
<p>Altidore is 20. Muller is 20. Hmmmm.</p>
<p>Anyway Germany played great, exciting soccer. Gerrard is one of my favorite players. I’m sorry to see him lose along with no luck Lampard. Rooney was pretty awful the whole tournament.</p>
<p>Speed seems to be very important. Ghana was faster than the US and Germany was faster than England.</p>
<p>Plus Ghana and Germany knew how to finish…especially Germany.</p>
<p>What phony reasons FIFA has with not using technology!!!</p>
<p>England clearly scored a goal.</p>
<p>Argentina was clearly offside.</p>
<p>Millions of people in the whole world saw the instant replay.</p>
<p>I am watching Wimbledon too and they use technology. What big sport don’t use technology in big tournaments nowadays.</p>
<p>Baseball…</p>
<p>^^Baseball uses replay to determine whether long-hit balls are homeruns but not for determining out/safe calls on the base paths or ball/strike calls of pitches.</p>
<p>Sumo wrestling, which is perhaps the oldest professional sport still played today, was among the very first to adopt instant replay. Since the wrestlers often fall together, and the loser is whoever touches the ground first, the judges were grateful for any help they could get in making the correct calls.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>If soccer could figure out a way to inject a little offense into the game such that a typical final score was say 8 to 6 instead of 1 to 0, or worse yet 0 to 0, soccer would be a lot more popular in the US.</p>
<p>It really is awful with the calls. Mexico played ok. I just can’t express the disappointent in the calls, though.</p>
<p>^Agreed. Hopefully FIFA will institute some changes soon.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Coureur, it all depends on your definition of success and minor sports. Where is it that soccer is “failing” in the United States? </p>
<ol>
<li>Isn’t there enough participation by amateurs? The scenes on Saturday morning throughout the nation easily belie such as negative view.<br></li>
<li>Isn’t the United States competitive in youth and professional soccer on the world scene? The United States does very well in world competition and usually maintains a ranking in the top 20 in the world. </li>
<li>Is it because there isn’t enough TV coverage? There are several sports that suffer from the same problem. Except for the Tour de France WHEN Armstrong IS competing, how many races do we get to see. You mention track and field … if left to the geniuses who run our networks, we do NOT even get to see all major races at the Olympics. How races from the Memorial Van Damme does anyone in the US get to see? Actually, how many people do even know who Ivo Van Damme was! </li>
</ol>
<p>All in all, I believe that people are simply TOO demanding when it comes to soccer. It is very successful on the participation level, and it is a sport that has given us some of the biggest excitements --think Women World Cup victory! Yes, it will never replace the NFL, the NBA, or baseball. But that has as much to do with the self-pleasing view that those sports are really WORLD sports and that the US is the undisputed number ONE in the discipline. It so happens that it IS a lot harder for the US to claim to be the best in sports that are … truly international. </p>
<p>In the end, people who enjoy soccer will still enjoy it tomorrow. Some people who DID NOT might decide to pay a bit of attention to it. Again, not a failure story, but one of success.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Alexandre, I was not talking about Landon Donovan only. I was talking about his generation. You might want to consider that Donovan was one of the youngest players to ever join the US team. Think about who might be left from the team who did so well 8 years ago. </p>
<p>You also need to consider that Donovan’s play requires a tremendous fitness level. Will he be able to sprint down the field as he did to build the successful score against Algeria in the 91th minute? Actually, will he be able to sprint at all? He is one the biggest talents on the planet, but he will need a very good supporting cast around him as age will force him to change his style of play. </p>
<p>If there is a lesson to be learned in THIS World Cup is that soccer is (more than ever) a game of speed and stamina. It is harder and harder for old glories to hide and get by on their past reputation. Did you see how France, Italy, and England looked slow, tired, and lethargic? And those teams fielded some of the biggest names of the past 10-12 years. Did you see poor Veron today? </p>
<p>Aging is cruel.</p>
<p>France’s problem in this world cup was not speed or stamina, it was complete lack of team chemistry, conflicting playing styles between the midfield and forwards (specifically between Ribery and Henry), inflated egos (Anelka and Evra) and horrible coaching. In fact, the French team is extremely quick, but they just weren’t interestedi in playing together.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Coureur, why mess with a winning formula? Soccer is the most popular sport in the world.</p>
<p>Would soccer be more popular with scores ressembling handball or waterpolo games? I do not think so! Aren’t baseball fans ecstatic when a no-hitter is in process? Aren’t MANY basketball games extremely boring until the final 4-5 minutes? </p>
<p>The reality is that a game that ends with a 0-0 score could more exciting than a game that ends in a 7-0 debacle, or more exciting that a Super Bowl game. </p>
<p>Each sport has to be appreciated for its own merits. While goals are indeed very important, there is more to the beautiful game than counting the goals. This said, the organizing bodies have tried several measures to increase the number of scores (larger goals, kick-ins as opposed to throw-ins, and a couple of other details) but have had little success.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>You answered your own question when you later wrote:</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Pro soccer can’t even keep up with the NHL in popularity, much less NFL, NBA, and MLB. And unlike college football and basketball, college soccer is not on anybody’s radar. </p>
<p>It’s true that soccer is a hugely popular kids game. My own kids played it for years. But when they grew up and went away to New England for college, soccer dropped from their consciousness and they became Red Sox fans. The vast majority of youth soccer players here in Southern Calif. do something similar. Play soccer as kids but become Dodgers, Chargers, Padres, and Lakers fans as adults. “Pro soccer? Yeah, I LA has a team I think. What’s their name? I don’t remember… Did you see the Dodger game last night?”</p>
<p>It’s the perpetual lament of the minor sport aficionado that if only the networks would televise it more or properly everyone would love it as much as I do. How could they not? Yeah, right. I hear this all the time from my fellow track and field fans. But the truth is the networks HAVE televised the Van Damme and other European tour meets in the US, and they learned the hard way that only I and my handful of my track buddies cared. The ratings were dismal.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Alexandre, Henry is the shadow of the player he once was. He no longer has the quickness that allowed to separate himself from defenders. Ribery might have the speed but he was not in the condition to play well at this level. This is not measured by the ability to run fast but by the constant movement in space that is required. Running and creating open spaces is what separates the best teams from the rest. If they did not want to or … could not, the result is the same. France looked old, lazy, ad lethargic. And, as a fan of France, you know that this did not start yesterday! </p>
<p>As far as coaching, a great team can overcome nutty coaching – or unconventional coaching. Just look at Maradona and Argentina! While Domenech’s style did not help at all, you have to have talented and dedicated players to compete at the highest levels.</p>
<p>
<br>
<p>Again, Coureur, why would it need to replace one of the Holy Trinity of sports? Does golf supplant them? Does Nascar racing? Does College football? Yet, are those sports consider … failures? </p>
<p>How many people are there in the United States who are glued to their televisions when Phelps competes in the Olympics but will never consider paying to see a swimming meet? How many people followed the Tour de France when Armstrong was WINNING but would not know if the race is in July or September. </p>
<p>I guess it all depends on one’s expectations. I think it is pretty remarkable that soccer is one of the highest participatory sport in the US, and especially for young girls. I think it is remarkable that the US can be competitive as it is when the best athletes are easily swayed by the lucrative careers in other sports. </p>
<p>And, fwiw, I am happy that soccer delivers some excitement during the Concacaf eliminations rounds and every FOUR years. If the sport does not have the type of lengthy seasons a la NBA and MLB, so be it. In a way, it saves one from a lot of boring and meaningless games. </p>
<p>Isn’t the beauty of sports that there is something for everyone?</p>
<p>Television ratings for the US-Ghana match show that 19,300,000 viewers tuned in to either ABC or Univision to watch. This makes it the highest viewed men’s soccer match ever in the US. If we ever reach the World Cup Final Match someday I bet that figure would nearly double.</p>
<p>^^Great. That’s less that 1/5th the number of US viewers who watched the last Super Bowl. </p>
<p>My point (back in post #438) wasn’t that no one watched during the World Cup. Heck, I watched that game myself. The point is that popularity and exposure during World Cup will not translate to popularity for pro soccer in the US the rest of the time. It will sink back into minor sport status in the US - just like swimming and track do in non-Olympic years.</p>
<p>In soccer, the exciting element of the game is the continuous playing time. Running across the field in 45 minutes to win at the end of the battle is more important than the total score, although the score does add more excitement. Interruption in the middle of the game is a violation of the sportmanship. That’s why soccer referees don’t allow fake fall or fake injury. The game must go on if there is no committed foul.</p>
<p>I think one of the reasons that soccer does not use technology to determine wrong or wright call is the game cannot be stopped for review. In order to earn a goal, the scoring team must clearly show the goal is made. It is fair to any team because that is the rule of the game.</p>
<p>Winning a soccer game is more like winning a chess game than winning a video game.</p>