Why is soccer so uncool to us and so cool to Europeans/foreigners (English, clubs)

[velodrome]

also one game of soccer can be absolutely turgid and another game can be edge-of-the-seat stuff (and certainly this isn't the only sport where this is true!)

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by calisnuffy

Soccer is fun to play and is enjoyable to watch because unlike American sports, the game doesnt stop every couple minutes for the whole match.

A soccer match stops all the time. It stops for free kicks, corner kicks, penalty kicks, injuries, etc. There are all types of disruptions to play, it's just that the clock doesn't stop. But make no mistake about it, the game does not have "non-stop action."

In fact, I'm not really sure if soccer has more "action" than American football per se. It depends on how you define "action." For a non-American football fan, you may think that a Tight End in motion or a shift in a defensive formation is not "action," but it sure as h*** is action to most fans. There's sometimes more action in setting up the play in football than there is in the actual play itself. Personally, I enjoy seeing Ray Lewis notice some subtle cue by the QB and then scream to the rest of the defense to change positions. I also enjoy seeing Peyton Manning sniff out the Blitz when he sees a cornerback creep closer to the line or a safety slightly out of position, and then audible out of the play. It's a chess match that is very exciting to watch. As a soccer fan, I can see how you would think it's boring, but a non-soccer fan may think that watching players line up for a corner kick lacks "action" as well.

I also disagree with some posters who say that the sport requires a level of fitness above and beyond other sports. I have played basketball my entire life, boxed for most of my life, and played a year of soccer in junior high school. Of those three sports, I thought boxing required the most fitness. In boxing, you are constantly engaged by a single opponent. Can you imagine how fast your heart is beating when punches are being thrown and adrenaline is surging non-stop through your veins? Basketball requires much more sprinting than soccer. There are a lot more quick cuts and sudden bursts of speed, plus, defending someone at the other end of the court takes a lot of energy. In soccer, midfielders run more than anyone else. If you're playing defense, you're really just sitting back chillin' until the ball comes back to your side of the field. So, in summary, soccer requires fitness, but not any more than what's required in other sports.

[Interpol76]

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

So, in summary, soccer requires fitness, but not any more than what's required in other sports.

I disagree somewhat.... In soccer you are only allowed a handful of substitutions per game. Most of the players are out there for the entire game with only a small break for halftime. In basketball you get to go sit down and rest during commercial breaks, time outs, or during a regular substitution. Plus the court is like 4/5 the size of a soccer field.
I've been playing competitive hockey since I was a little kid, and I'm here to tell you...soccer takes a hell of alot more out of you than hockey. In hockey, sure you "spint" for a full shift, but shifts only last 2-4 minutes usually (or in the case of the NHL, 50 seconds- 2 min.) and then you get to go sit down. In baseball, players are just standing still or sitting down 90 precent of the time. Same thing with football where you run a play for 5 seconds and then get to stand still for 30 seconds or so...then jump over to the bench and sit down while tv commercials are rolling or the offense, defense or special teams are on the field.

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by Interpol76

I disagree somewhat.... In soccer you are only allowed a handful of substitutions per game. Most of the players are out there for the entire game with only a small break for halftime. In basketball you get to go sit down and rest during commercial breaks, time outs, or during a regular substitution. Plus the court is like 4/5 the size of a soccer field.
I've been playing competitive hockey since I was a little kid, and I'm here to tell you...soccer takes a hell of alot more out of you than hockey. In hockey, sure you "spint" for a full shift, but shifts only last 2-4 minutes usually (or in the case of the NHL, 50 seconds- 2 min.) and then you get to go sit down. In baseball, players are just standing still or sitting down 90 precent of the time. Same thing with football where you run a play for 5 seconds and then get to stand still for 30 seconds or so...then jump over to the bench and sit down while tv commercials are rolling or the offense, defense or special teams are on the field.

Yeah, but most soccer players aren't running the entire length of the field. If you're on defense, and the ball is on the side of the field with your forwards, you're really just an onlooker at that point. In basketball, you're always engaged as long as the play is alive. All players have to play both offense and defense. Also, there aren't too many plays in soccer where you engage in an all-out sprint. In basketball, you're running a fastbreak and pushing the ball as often as possible, and you get winded very quickly. There's also the added element of fighting for position in the post, which takes a great deal of upper body strength. Strength is a much more significant variable in basketball than it is in soccer.

There is no way in the world that a basketball or football game could be played without breaks. People would die. Basketball requires too much sprinting. Football also requires a lot of sprinting. Have you ever seen Jamal Lewis or Clinton Portis when they get back to the bench? They need oxygen tanks to breathe. I imagine most people would after having slammed into 300 pound linemen who are trying to fall on top of them. Football raises your adrenaline to a level that's not reached in soccer, and that level is simply unsustainable over a long period of time.

[kobe_ramone]

because football is just the greatest sport in the world,only US think not

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by kobe_ramone

because football is just the greatest sport in the world,only US think not

There's no such thing as a "greatest sport in the world."

All sports have something to offer, and yes, that even includes golf. It's always funny to hear people say:

"Oh, that little guy Floyd Mayweather, I'd just walk right up to him and punch him in the gut!"

"That Roger Federer guy! Why don't people just hit the ball away from him and make him run instead of the other way around?"

"What's so tough about basketball? You just run around and put the ball in the basket."

"I can't believe Tiger Woods makes so much money. Any fool can knock a ball into a hole!"

A large part of why Americans think soccer is uncool is honestly ignorance. But then again, I think that most spectators of ALL sports are largely ignorant when it comes to deciphering the finer details of a sport that truly make it great. How many people honestly paid attention to the type of three-quarters pressure traps the Celtics used against the Lakers in the NBA Finals? Most people aren't looking for that. They're looking for high-flying dunks, acrobatic moves, trash talking between Kobe and Paul Pierce, and crazy, retarded soundbytes from Ron Artest during the post-game press conference. ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED???

The people want entertainment. Watching Lebron James slam Tim Duncan's face off is entertaining, even if you don't know the difference between a zone and man-to-man defense (see My GF). Watching the highlights after the game with Charles Barkley and his ridiculous comments is entertaining. Watching the Fox pre-game show with Howie, Jimmie Johnson, and Terry Bradshaw, along with the busty, blonde weather girl, is entertaining. You don't need to know anything about the sport because it's not about the sport. It's about the raw entertainment value.

In the States, most people don't find soccer to be entertaining. The most obviously entertaining event in a soccer game is a goal, especially if it's scored by a scissor kick, but that does not happen very often. You'd only have two things to show on Sports Center, very few stats (which means you can't have a fantasy league), and no post-game, Shannon Sharpe/Terrell Owens/Ocho Cinco style drama to report. Does anybody remember this golden nugget from Shannon Sharpe?

"Do I like him? No. Is he my friend? No. Is he ugly? Yes. If I saw him in a snow storm and his truck was broken but my truck was working fine, would I help him out? NO!!!"

That's what people want. They want the obvious. Much of the action in soccer is subtle, and that makes it beautiful, but your average meathead can't understand that. On top of it all, the U.S. doesn't have the historical and cultural connection to the game to draw in hoards of fans to the WC the way they're drawn to the Super Bowl. To be sure, there are a lot of meatheaded soccer fans in Europe and elsewhere that know close to squat about the game, and they are the same as people in the States who know close to squat about football, but yet live for Super Bowl Sunday.

[velodrome]

good post bajanyankee!

will correct you on one thing though, there are certainly fantasy leagues for soccer and they are extremely popular in at least the UK

Burnley 4 Tottenham 2 (http://fantasy.premierleague.com/fixture/13.html - broken link)

here are the points per player for a game at the end of last season

[Miaiam]

Nobody who appreciates soccer is focused solely on the score. There are a lot of great matches with no goals scored.

It is the action, the skills, the speed and ability of players (who play with nothing but a ball) that make it so interesting.

Obviously the goals are somehow the highlight of the game. But they are just a part of it.

[velodrome]

well yes and no - i mean the diehard fans of Udinese, CSKA Moscow, Ajax, West Ham United, Boca Juniors, Galatasary, Celtic or wherever are pretty focused on the score and would prefer an ugly win to a beautiful tie or loss.

Often with 'smaller sports' - or ones where the sport is competing for position at a local or national level (in whichever country) - fans tend to be 'fans of the game' as well as of their team - whereas where a sport is dominant or at least in a very strong position this isn't the case (partly because its assumed and implied). soccer fans in the US (or New Zealand or Australia and others) have to defend soccer to 'curious colleagues that just saw a really dull game' because they are interested not only in the fortunes of their team but also of the sport as a whole in the country. This just isn't the case in Brazil or England or Spain or Germany

If England were humilated 10-0 by Slovenia and sent home in their last game it would have no effect on the popularity of the game in England. Similarly if every world cup game had ended 0-0 and been really boring (I know 0-0s CAN be tense and exciting) it wouldn't effect the popularity either. People might say "that was a **** world cup" but then they'd be psyched for the start of the domestic season just the same

When does the Scotland team ever even make it to the World Cup - but look at the attendances for Celtic or Rangers games in the Scottish domestic league!

[cmptrwlt]

Originally Posted by Miaiam

Nobody who appreciates soccer is focused solely on the score. There are a lot of great matches with no goals scored.

It is the action, the skills, the speed and ability of players (who play with nothing but a ball) that make it so interesting.

Obviously the goals are somehow the highlight of the game. But they are just a part of it.

Exactly. I'm only familiar with most of the rules but true fans really understand the game. I think it's easy to underestimate soccer.