An American View Of The World Cup

[FourLaneBlue]

The article mentions - "In fact, you would think if even one out of every five people in China took an interest in soccer, that would be some big pool of talent to draw from when picking a squad"

Actually, I'd reckon about 1 in 5 of youngsters (at least) might be right in those who take an interest, far more if only counting boys. Just because they play it however doesn't stop the vast majority being crap at it.

Personally I thought the article was quite funny. Not Oscar Wilde witticisms or anything but interesting. As can be seen by this part...

"I just wonder, though, if there's something that could be done to boost soccer's popularity. I wanted to save hockey too, but obviously I was too late.

I know when baseball took a dive in this country — and you can look it up — steroids brought the fans back in droves as they watched big player after big player power the ball out of the park. You could even argue that steroids put the NFL on the map years ago, the huge hits making it the must-see TV that it is every Sunday."

Now...why are people on here taking this article seriously and making themselves look silly? It's more than a little tongue in cheek, relax guys.

If we are talking about fastest growing sports it were baseball a few years back with the Asian nations taking a huge interest in it but that has changed significantly. Basketball is the world biggest growing sport at the moment and i know my basketball.

That's true, it is growing in popularity but I find it hard to see it ever overtaking football as it isn't quite as simple a sport, football's genius is in its simplicity; all you need is a ball. Anyway, most people I know like more than one sport - whether cricket/rugby/hockey/basketball/formula 1 etc. Don't see why people should have to keep comparing them with each other, they all have their own place. It never has to be one or the other.

Edited June 5, 2006 by FourLaneBlue

[speeeeeeedie]

Good one this, especially for me living in the USA and having heard these stories since I arrived here. The article is taking the Michael; the LA Times is well known as being a liberal, left leaning, newspaper (see always having a go a George Bush). Los Angeles has 2 MLS franchises, one of the best university teams in the country (UCLA; Friedel's old uni), loads of kids playing, and even Rod Stewart's Hollywood United! He's playing to his audience by having a go at the intolerant folk who don't understand the rest of the world and actually get mad when football is mentioned. Some American journalists do not like the sport, they do take any opportunity they can to put it down to promote their own favourite. It will get interesting over the next few weeks as for the first time ever all world cup games are on live on TV. ESPN has been promoting it quite well and some journo's will jump on the bandwagon as it will get them reads and ESPN will be friendlier later on to those who promote what they are showing. I hope the US does well just for the coverage; they start winning and it will be like last year's Ashes series.

I can't be ar$ed debating baseball, basketball, college American football attendances, it's all apples and oranges.

[jkritchey]

Some of these moron sports columnists are so entrenched in the current sports media cabal (that promotes footy bashing, and worships at the altar of the US revenue generating sports that keep them employed) that they run the same column every 4 years to remind the knuckle draggers that read them of their footy hating bona fides.

Why their editors allow this moronic practice to continue is a testament to the intellectual laziness of the US sports press. You'll see a bunch of this over the next month....

Edited June 5, 2006 by jkritchey

[speeeeeeedie]

JK, most of what I've read so far has been positive. Maybe it's because of all the live games ESPN needs to recoup its outlay by using journos to promote it but there is far more coverage this time around.

[jkritchey]

JK, most of what I've read so far has been positive. Maybe it's because of all the live games ESPN needs to recoup its outlay by using journos to promote it but there is far more coverage this time around.

Agreed with that. My local paper is the Washington Post and their coverage has been thorough and knowledgeable. However, none of their big name columnists have weighed in yet, as they are occupied with the NBA and baseball.

[Exiled_Rover]

If I was going to write a reply to this thread, it'd look something like Lathund's post. Well done sir.