You highlight something that makes FR soccer threads amusing: on the one hand, there are people arguing that soccer is Marxist, etc., and on the other hand, there are people arguing that it is too difficult to score (and that scoring should be made easier).
posted on 03/27/2012 5:39:56 AM PDT
By arguing that scoring should be made easier in soccer, I'm also arguing for some sort of scoring in soccer. Soccer is so low-scoring and unrewarding that it dwarfs all other sports in that respect. In any sport, there must be some kind of reward for good onfield activity. If players are executing all sorts of great plays and doing fantastic athletic things and rarely getting a chance to score, you have a very boring sport.
But I find low scores in all sports are exceptionally boring. If you tell me a football game will end up 3-0, I'm not going to watch it. In fact, most sports are set up for low scores. For example, why do pitchers get four balls instead of three? If pitchers only got three balls, they'd have to throw more strikes meaning the batters would get more good pitches to hit, meaning higher scores. Higher scores means more players running the bases and more chances for great defensive plays like trying to throw a runner out as he tries for an extra base. But that's just me. Like soccer, it seems most baseball fans are content with low-scoring games. If you only gave one point for touchdowns and a half-point for a field goal, American football games would seem low-scoring as well. My rule for all sports: more offense-scoring please.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson