• Twitter
  • Twitter

Why Americans Hate Soccer

by Rick Moran on 23 July 2009

Soccer match

I know I am going against the grain by being a soccer fan in America. But I really can’t help myself. Perhaps it’s because I’m a baseball fan that I appreciate the patience demonstrated by good teams, or the delicious feeling of watching the build up on offense, the teamwork on defense, and the great individual skills on display.

Alas, the American game rarely rises to the level found in much of Europe, South America, and other soccer crazy meccas where people live, eat, drink, and die with their national team’s success or failure.

I’ve heard the arguments why the “World’s Game” has never caught on here and I’m sure you can recite them along with me. But here’s a clueless fellow who ascribes our lack of enthusiasm for soccer as a result of our basic political beliefs:

Watching the game, one could not have been happier for a team that has not really performed all that well in recent years or, for that matter, in the first few games of this tournament. Indeed, in the first two games, the U.S. was hammered by Italy and Brazil and only got into the semifinal match by beating Egypt and the fluke of a very arcane scoring system that soccer uses to break ties among teams. And even in this game, a neutral observer would have said that Spanish players clearly outplayed the Americans, outshooting the U.S. squad by a margin of 20 shots on goal. As the U.S. goalkeeper and star of the game Tim Howard noted afterwards, “Sometimes football is a funny thing.”

Well, yes, it is. As someone who didn’t play soccer growing up, but had a dad who did and whose own kids played as well, I can say unquestionably that it is the sport in which the team that dominates loses more often than any other major sport I know of. Or, to put it more bluntly, the team that deserves to win doesn’t. For some soccer-loving friends, this is perfectly okay. Indeed, they will argue that it’s a healthy, conservative reminder of how justice does not always prevail in life.

Well, hooey on that. And, thankfully, Americans are not buying it. In spite of the fact that one can drive by an open field on Saturdays and usually see it filled with young boys and girls playing soccer, the game’s popularity has not moved anywhere toward being a major sport here in the United States. It’s grown for sure but not close to where folks once expected it to be given the number of youth that have played the game over the past two decades.

For sure, there may be a number of reasons that is the case but my suspicion is that the so-called “beautiful game” is not so beautiful to American sensibilities. We like, as good small “d” democrats, our underdogs for sure but we also still expect folks in the end to get their just desert. And, in sports, that means excellence should prevail. Of course, the fact that is often not the case when it comes to soccer may be precisely the reason the sport is so popular in the countries of Latin America and Europe.

Gary Schmitt of AEI is a clueless git. First of all, that “arcane” scoring system which allowed the US to advance is a series of tie breakers (just like the NFL), although the criteria in this case was total number of goals (USA had 4 to Italy’s 3). How much less bizarre is it for an NFL team who goes 9-7 and wins their division to make the playoffs while a couple of 10-6 teams miss the postseason because their division winner had a better record? “Excellence” being rewarded? Phooey!

Then there’s the utter malarkey that many teams that dominate the game stats wise or just have the better of the play usually lose. Again, let’s look at the NFL and notice that on any given Sunday, there are several teams who are out gained on offense, outplayed on defense, but catch a few lucky breaks and win the game. It is obvious Schmitt is not a sports fan if he thinks that such happenstances are uncommon.

As in football, the team with a lead in soccer will play it safe, usually dropping a couple of players back from midfield in order to prevent the other team from organizing an effective offense. This will invariably lead to the team that is behind having much the better of the play. Also, the leading team will push forward fewer players on the counterattack. The result is exactly as Schmitt describes but the reason is not because of any particular flaw in the game as much as it is a deliberate strategy by the team that is ahead. Of course Spain took 20 more shots on goal. They were behind for almost the entire game. How many NFL teams have we seen build up a big lead in the first half and basically coast the rest of the way? His criticism is nonsense to anyone who knows anything about sports.

But that’s the problem in America. I think in order to love the game, you must be familiar with at least some of its nuances and strategies. There is a method to much of the madness the casual fan might see on the field and what looks like a lot of running around is actually a purposeful offense — probing for weakness, switching the play from one side of the field to the other to exploit an advantage, the give and go, and the teamwork involved in knowing where your teammates are on the field all the time — these are all practiced repeatedly by good teams in order to break down a defense and create a chance to score.

Defense is the loveliest of dances – a synchronized ballet where defenders react to where the ball is on the field and move almost in unison to block the assault. If you’ve only watched the game on TV, you can be forgiven for not being able to see much of this. And if you’ve only watched American soccer – the MSL variety – you don’t see much of it anyway. The American club league is an inferior product which helps explain to the Schmitt’s of the world why soccer hasn’t caught on here.

The fact is, American players – except the very best – lack the individual skills found most elsewhere in the world. This translates into inferior match play when watching the pro league in America. It’s like the difference between watching a Double or Triple “A” baseball game and the Majors. The quality of play just isn’t up to snuff. American players who make it to Europe (with one or two exceptions) do not become stars in the better club leagues in England, Spain, and Italy.

Couple that with the intense competition for a finite amount of sports dollars, add a  small group of commentators who seek to politicize the game by accusing aficionados of being “Euro-trash” or worse, and  it is little wonder to me why soccer has never caught on despite American kids embracing the sport in their youth.

Legendary English football writer Steven Wells (who just died last week) saw the ugliness of what he terms “soccerphobes” in this Guardian piece from January of this year:

Meet radio show host Jim Rome. Jim – a short man with a Village People biker moustache – is the pope of soccerphobia. “My son is not playing soccer, ” promises Jim. “I will hand him ice skates and a shimmering sequinned blouse before I hand him a soccer ball.” Jim’s soccerphobia is part of a grand tradition of crassly xenophobic, casually homophobic, tediously sexist and smugly pig-ignorant soccer-bashing in mainstream American sports journalism. As Sport Illustrated’s soccer-friendly Alexander Wolff put it: “There isn’t a US daily without a ‘soccer stinks’ beat guy”.

“Their mania is in direct proportion to their insecurity,” laughs Miguel Almeida, a New York-based soccer writer. “Hence its intensity. And the phenomenon pops up every time the World Cup rolls around, its reappearance as certain as swarming locusts.”

Not all soccer-haters are cliché-recycling hacks. Meet (right-wing) intellectual think-tanker Stephen Moore. “I am convinced,” writes Stephen, “that the ordeal of soccer teaches our kids all the wrong lessons in life. Soccer is the Marxist concept of the labour theory of value applied to sports – which may explain why socialist nations dominate the World Cup.”

Schmitt isn’t that bad but it begs the question; is there a political element to people’s hate of soccer?

If there is, I don’t feel it. I enjoy the game as a sports fan. Hell, I even enjoyed watching the Afghan national game Buzkashi. And that’s because there are certain universal elements to sports and competition that make watching soccer or baseball, or any other game where athletes perform and teams compete to win such a joy. “The human drama of athletic competition” was part of the opening of the old ABC Wide World of Sports that featured every kind of game under the sun including Irish hurling, Australian rules football, and something as tame as curling. Those curlers were just as determined to win,  just as competitive as any other athlete who takes the field, or court, or ice.

I don’t see politics or underlying political truths in games, and those who do are trying too hard. The loons who wail about football or hockey being too violent or teaching our kids the wrong life lessons are no different. Concentrate on the stellar athletes – the human body in motion is enormously pleasing to watch when it is done by those born with the grace and strength to play the game – any game – at the highest level. The desire to win, the sacrifices for the team; it is the same in any game and says more about our basic humanity than it does about any silly political generality made up by partisans who wish to score points against their enemies.

Not everyone likes football.  Few like baseball anymore. More still do not like soccer.  That’s the way it has been and will probably continue to be even if our national team were to succeed beyond all expectations and win the World Cup.

About Rick Moran

Rick Moran, a 52 year old libertine from Algonquin, Illinois, is a freelance writer with more than 15 years experience in grass roots political action. He blogs daily at Right Wing Nut House.


1 John Burgess 23 July 2009 at 13:16

I’ll be ultra-cynical and say the reason soccer isn’t popular in the US is that it’s unpopular for TV networks because it cuts into advertising revenue. Soccer is not adorned with myriad times-out for dropped passes, out of bounds plays, or contracts between the NFL and TV.
If advertisers could put ads on the screen during uninterrupted action, they might be happier to support the sport.

2 Steve Hynd 23 July 2009 at 14:28

“Gary Schmitt of AEI is a clueless git.”

Rick, for once we agree wholeheartedly on something. John Burgess is doubtless correct with his “follow the money” cynicism.

But I do wonder whether the antipathy of the likes of AEI’s Schmitt and former Heritage fellow Moore arises because soccer doesn’t favor all-out, frontal, grinding assaults. Their preferred neocon foreign policy/military strategy may show a mindset predisposed against soccers attacks down the wings, slowly developed offenses and tactical withdrawals in order to to try another route to the goal.

Warmest regards, Steve @ Newshoggers

3 fester 23 July 2009 at 15:59

Rick — I especially agree with your middle conclusion — US soccer really is not that good at any level, so the game can be quite ugly. I referee soccer and I consider myself lucky if 10% of my matches are actually good matches. And that 10% is from the “best” clubs in Western PA, Ohio, New York, Michigan, West Virginia and Western Maryland. Sunday morning rec-travel league is almost uniformly atrocious where I am mainly trying to get out of the players way instead of actually facilitating a good match.

4 B. Minich 27 July 2009 at 23:48

I must say that I recently watched some of the Chealsea vs. AC Milan game on ESPN – the one at M&T Bank Stadium.  After getting over the weirdness of seeing soccer played in a stadium I watch football be played in once a year (being a Steeler fan), I really appreciated it the most out of any soccer match I’ve seen.  This had to do with two things: first, learning the nuances of defense and offense and the strategies used by each side to advance and move the ball, and watching a fair bit of hockey over the last few years.
Hockey has a lot in common with soccer (there is also a lot of differences, obviously).  But one of the similarities is how each team tries to gain the zones, and you can see who is doing better by watching which end the ball stays in.  After finally understanding hockey, I now have a much better understanding of soccer.

5 Triumph 29 July 2009 at 13:19

The Jim Rome-type soccerphobes are part of a dying demographic.
As the US becomes more cosmopolitan (both with more immigrants here and with more “natives” being exposed to global culture) soccer has gotten more popular.  Hell, the Seattle Sounders are out-drawing the Mariners this year!
The play in the MLS is about on par with the English Football League Championship (one step below the EPL).
MLS has taken a good approach towards growing the game–building soccer-only stadiums, not expanding too quickly (a la NHL) and cultivating strong supporters groups.
This is only going to help the sport develop here in the long run.  The main thing the US is missing is a strong developmental program.  All the top European clubs have extensive developmental teams and even campuses to cultivate talent.  In the US, junior soccer is more of a suburban thing that requires parents to have money to shell out to travel; thus, the sport misses out on top junior atheletes.
It would also do wonders for the sport here if ESPN got the US broadcast contract for the Premiership.  I think Fox Soccer plays the games, but not too many people get that channel.
Once you watch the Premiership, you realize how cool the sport really is.

6 Edward Royce 3 August 2009 at 20:15

Soccer isn’t popular because it’s boring.
It’s like reading ‘Moby Dick’.  It’s a classic.  Many people like it.  It’s also boring.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: