Everything about Soccer Sucks

Home of Football Tailgating, Intramural Football and the occasional baseball game
Forum rules
"The opinions expressed on this board are property of the poster and do not reflect the opinion of EagleOutsider, Boston College or Boston College Athletics"

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby TontoKowalski on Mon May 20, 2013 9:23 am

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:Tonto just said "soccer sucks" eloquently.

The ADHD thing is why the Adderall generation and their parents like soccer. No one under the age of 30 can sit and watch a fucking baseball game in peace. Going to the park is intolerable, every up and down up and down christ whatchafuckingpitchortwo.


...and so you see the firsthand problem with my brain. I have to dissect and pick apart why I dislike it so much or it bothers me endlessly. Great benefit, terrible curse. It's also why I so utterly despise the particular brand of stupidity personified by ib.
User avatar
TontoKowalski
Merkert Hall
 
Posts: 4425
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 9:20 pm
Karma: 2387

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby cvilleagle on Mon May 20, 2013 10:48 am

b0mberMan {l Wrote}: If we had a league that was full of the best players in the world int he US, maybe I'd take the time.


This is how I feel about it. In fact, I would take the time if that were the case. But it's not. And I can't get into "rooting for laundry" for a place to which I have no connection.
Image
User avatar
cvilleagle
Devlin Hall
 
Posts: 6639
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 4:14 pm
Karma: 1170

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby twballgame9 on Mon May 20, 2013 11:08 am

If the US made a run and had sufficient star power, it might be easier to watch the respective players on their EPL teams and root for those teams. For a while I was watching the occasional Fulham game to see if Dempsey would score, or Everton to see how Howard would play.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 34343
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2489

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby hansen on Mon May 20, 2013 11:09 am

TontoKowalski {l Wrote}:I have had various friends and acquaintances try to get me into soccer the past few years - it felt like years ago, when people in my 8th grade class tried to get me into cigarettes because of how much they thought I would like it (family members died from lung cancer - I despise smoking and always have). I gave soccer more of a chance than I gave smoking in 8th grade (although in truth, perhaps I should have channeled my 8th grade self here). Here are some thoughts:

1. 'Tottenham/Chelsea/Man -U ais my favorite team' - this interests me. How did you choose a favorite team? These are from ancient cities and neighborhoods in another country, what connection do you have to them? My wife's extended family is from a place in Europe that has a passionate soccer following and none of them are really into it... the typical response I get from someone in this country is 'you like the style of play'. More on this in a second, but ...

2. The introduction of EPL soccer in this country is shameless product placement and marketing. Someone wealthy decided to sell soccer to a large, unsoccer'ed but sports-loving American environment and did so, with apparent success. But it's shameless. Now look, sports is a product, it's been a product for years, great. I recognize this. But sports in this country became a product because so many people loved the game(s). The sports love here existed before the product placement. The product-ifying wearies me. I hate this conference realignment. ESPN is completely unwatchable because they arent even selling sports anymore, they're selling ESPN.

But here Soccer is being put on a platform with mango flavoring, right? Hey, the US might have a taste for mango drinks, which are wildly popular in Asia and South America, let's try it there. Let's try soccer!

So people choose a team completely arbitrarily to follow, and then follow that team. This seemed strange and unsettling to me. What possible connection does anyone in this country have with any of these stadiums or places?

3. There's the EPL. There's a Spanish league, an Italian league, a German league. Other leagues. Then some subset of those plays each other. Periodically, teams are not in the majors anymore and go into the minors? This is a fucking lot of shit to keep track of, especially for a guy who wonders where Wales and Campbell went.

4. This 'style of play' nonsense. I have a stupidly analytical mind. It's a great benefit and a terrifying setback simultaneously - I struggle to use its strengths while holding back its perverse, demonic impulses. After spending some time studying soccer, I have concluded that there is little in the way of strategy or style of play. There are tactical tendencies and these can be spawned by mismatches. To the extent that there are strategic differences, it has chiefly to do with things like 'The Germans are really fucking big and the Eye-Tals are tiny and fast' - which are basically geopolitical mismatches that have existed for thousands of years. Basically, a bunch of dudes kick a ball around until someone kicks it around someone else, and then something might happen. When there's a corner kick, something might happen. Strategy!

5. In addition to there being a lot of teams, players, leagues, and countries, there are a lot of songs. I don't like to sing. You wouldn't like me to sing near you, either. I can't sing. I can't carry a tune. Why is everyone singing? Why don't you all go join a choir or a boy band? The only song that should really be sung at a sports event is 'Who's your father, referee'. All this singing crap is really too much.

6. This one comes from soccer fans from other countries: 'Football is BORING. A football game only averages 11 minutes of actual play. Soccer they never stop playing!' This, to me, is the most damning criticism of soccer and its fans: if something isn't happening AT ALL TIMES, the entire audience might change the channel to CSPAN or something. This is so outrageously stupid. I like chess. I'm not great at it, but I enjoy it as a hobby, as a quiet, intellectual way to pass the time, as a thing to do with my kids after Sunday dinner or in a blitz match. By the definition above, chess isn't exciting. In fact, chess is THRILLING if you have even a cursory understanding of it and guess what? There's not a lot of shit happening in a chess match. There isn't a lot of movement. Things aren't going up and down the board, really. And yet... it is high strategy and mind-bendingly awesome.

Is there not enough ADHD in this country already? We have to add a sport where something has to be happening all the time? Are animated fish tank screensavers more exciting than chess? By the above definition, it would seem so.

This ties into the shameless marketing and product placement of European soccer in this country - it's a product and everyone who loves Chelsea or whatever has just bought. Buy, buy, buy! Suckers!

7. 'If you like hockey, you'll like soccer. They're really similar.' This is almost the same as above but worth mentioning - anyone who says this knows nothing about hockey. Hockey has a ton of strategy and a lot of movement; soccer has seemingly no strategy and a lot of movement. In hockey, the goaltender can disproportionately affect outcomes. In soccer, this is not the case. In hockey, the personnel changes mean there is a strategy to timing and rotations. Hits and contact factor in. This is another thing I hear from Europeans and the truth is that they don't know anything about hockey if they say this.

8. I will unconditionally cheer for the US to win anything international. So that end, I'll follow the world cup or olympic version of almost anything. I agree that we should try to ruthlessly clobber countries in whatever sport it may be. But ... I don't follow badminton or table tennis or sailing, etc.

To each their own, but let's not kid each other with this soccer stuff.


I disagree with most of your conclusions here but you raise interesting points worthy of discussion.

disclosure. I play in a sunday soccer co-ed beer league. it's a good way to stay in shape, drink beers with guys, and flirt with fit chicks. :skank highly recommend. :D
HANSENPOST :shrug

Image
User avatar
hansen
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 19043
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Your Mom’s House
Karma: -2236

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby b0mberMan on Mon May 20, 2013 11:16 am

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:If the US made a run and had sufficient star power, it might be easier to watch the respective players on their EPL teams and root for those teams. For a while I was watching the occasional Fulham game to see if Dempsey would score, or Everton to see how Howard would play.

This is a good point. Even if we had a league where we could keep the best players from our country stateside, that might do it for me. But if we want to develop real talent and be able to compete in the National tourneys, our best players have to go to Europe. and I don't care about Everton or the Swiss leagues or any of that, and can't be bothered to rearrange my weekends to make sure I have time to watch televised games at 8 am.
NorthEndEagle {l Wrote}:cat hair pee fire
b0mberMan
Lyons Hall
 
Posts: 9580
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 8:43 pm
Location: Cat hair pee fire
Karma: 2681

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby TontoKowalski on Mon May 20, 2013 11:28 am

hansen,

What are your differences? I'm curious, since this is, like most of my thinking, an entirely internal and hermit'ed sort of a monologue.
User avatar
TontoKowalski
Merkert Hall
 
Posts: 4425
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 9:20 pm
Karma: 2387

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby innocentbystander on Mon May 20, 2013 11:35 am

b0mberMan {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:If the US made a run and had sufficient star power, it might be easier to watch the respective players on their EPL teams and root for those teams. For a while I was watching the occasional Fulham game to see if Dempsey would score, or Everton to see how Howard would play.

This is a good point. Even if we had a league where we could keep the best players from our country stateside, that might do it for me. But if we want to develop real talent and be able to compete in the National tourneys, our best players have to go to Europe. and I don't care about Everton or the Swiss leagues or any of that, and can't be bothered to rearrange my weekends to make sure I have time to watch televised games at 8 am.


isn't this just $$$$ (or lack-there-of?)

maybe I'm over-simplifying but isn't it always about the money? the best European basketball players don't play in Europe, they move to the States and play in the NBA because of the money. perhaps, professional soccer here in the United States doesn't pay its all its players the big David Bechham money because the crowd doesn't pay big money to watch them and the league doesn't get big money from TV?

i don't know. all I know is I wont watch Soccer either way, not enough scoring. there is nothing more boring than watching a bunch of guys playing kickball-keep-away for 90 minutes and a 0-0 score.
Feminism: Eve eats ALL the apples, gives God the middle finder when He confronts her, and has the serpent serve Adam with an injunction ordering him to stay away from her AND to provide her food and shelter because he dragged her out of the Garden.
User avatar
innocentbystander
BC Guy
 
Posts: 21762
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 9:40 pm
Location: Pac-12 Hell
Karma: -3661

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby cvilleagle on Mon May 20, 2013 12:00 pm

innocentbystander {l Wrote}:
b0mberMan {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:If the US made a run and had sufficient star power, it might be easier to watch the respective players on their EPL teams and root for those teams. For a while I was watching the occasional Fulham game to see if Dempsey would score, or Everton to see how Howard would play.

This is a good point. Even if we had a league where we could keep the best players from our country stateside, that might do it for me. But if we want to develop real talent and be able to compete in the National tourneys, our best players have to go to Europe. and I don't care about Everton or the Swiss leagues or any of that, and can't be bothered to rearrange my weekends to make sure I have time to watch televised games at 8 am.


isn't this just $$$$ (or lack-there-of?)

maybe I'm over-simplifying but isn't it always about the money? the best European basketball players don't play in Europe, they move to the States and play in the NBA because of the money. perhaps, professional soccer here in the United States doesn't pay its all its players the big David Bechham money because the crowd doesn't pay big money to watch them and the league doesn't get big money from TV?

i don't know. all I know is I wont watch Soccer either way, not enough scoring. there is nothing more boring than watching a bunch of guys playing kickball-keep-away for 90 minutes and a 0-0 score.

Yeah, it's a little bit cyclical. We don't have the great players, so people don't watch, so we don't have the money, so we don't have great players.
Image
User avatar
cvilleagle
Devlin Hall
 
Posts: 6639
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 4:14 pm
Karma: 1170

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby innocentbystander on Mon May 20, 2013 12:10 pm

cvilleagle {l Wrote}:
innocentbystander {l Wrote}:
b0mberMan {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:If the US made a run and had sufficient star power, it might be easier to watch the respective players on their EPL teams and root for those teams. For a while I was watching the occasional Fulham game to see if Dempsey would score, or Everton to see how Howard would play.

This is a good point. Even if we had a league where we could keep the best players from our country stateside, that might do it for me. But if we want to develop real talent and be able to compete in the National tourneys, our best players have to go to Europe. and I don't care about Everton or the Swiss leagues or any of that, and can't be bothered to rearrange my weekends to make sure I have time to watch televised games at 8 am.


isn't this just $$$$ (or lack-there-of?)

maybe I'm over-simplifying but isn't it always about the money? the best European basketball players don't play in Europe, they move to the States and play in the NBA because of the money. perhaps, professional soccer here in the United States doesn't pay its all its players the big David Bechham money because the crowd doesn't pay big money to watch them and the league doesn't get big money from TV?

i don't know. all I know is I wont watch Soccer either way, not enough scoring. there is nothing more boring than watching a bunch of guys playing kickball-keep-away for 90 minutes and a 0-0 score.

Yeah, it's a little bit cyclical. We don't have the great players, so people don't watch, so we don't have the money, so we don't have great players.


but would people in the United States watch professional soccer even if we HAD the best players?
Feminism: Eve eats ALL the apples, gives God the middle finder when He confronts her, and has the serpent serve Adam with an injunction ordering him to stay away from her AND to provide her food and shelter because he dragged her out of the Garden.
User avatar
innocentbystander
BC Guy
 
Posts: 21762
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 9:40 pm
Location: Pac-12 Hell
Karma: -3661

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby 2001Eagle on Mon May 20, 2013 12:19 pm

[quote="TontoKowalski"]
1. 'Tottenham/Chelsea/Man -U ais my favorite team' - this interests me. How did you choose a favorite team? These are from ancient cities and neighborhoods in another country, what connection do you have to them? My wife's extended family is from a place in Europe that has a passionate soccer following and none of them are really into it... the typical response I get from someone in this country is 'you like the style of play'. More on this in a second, but ....[quote="TontoKowalski"]


I also disagree with most of this, but at least appreciate that you took the time to think about it rather than just dismiss out of hand. As to this one, I think that you underestimate the importance of locale in developing a liking for a team.

For instance, although it pains me to admit it, I am am a Man United fan (the Mets fan in me despises the idea of rooting for a Yankee-like organization) and the reason is pretty simple. At the age of 7-8 after being plucked out of the AYSO league to play for a premier/travel team, I asked my coach why our team was called _____________ United.* The coach, who had played professionally in England, responded that it was a a name fashioned after Manchester United. I immediately found everything that I could about them at the school and town library, and received a book about the team's history for a bday present (long before the interwebs was a thing). I came to like Man U and was always excited to see a blurb about them in the Sunday sports editions of the Globe or NYT, however infrequently. Been a fan ever since.

*Descriptive place names have been omitted to avoid rocketcarrage.
Coach hard. Love hard.
User avatar
2001Eagle
Merkert Hall
 
Posts: 3040
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 3:26 pm
Karma: 123

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby hansen on Mon May 20, 2013 1:57 pm

TontoKowalski {l Wrote}:I have had various friends and acquaintances try to get me into soccer the past few years - it felt like years ago, when people in my 8th grade class tried to get me into cigarettes because of how much they thought I would like it (family members died from lung cancer - I despise smoking and always have). I gave soccer more of a chance than I gave smoking in 8th grade (although in truth, perhaps I should have channeled my 8th grade self here). Here are some thoughts:

1. 'Tottenham/Chelsea/Man -U ais my favorite team' - this interests me. How did you choose a favorite team? These are from ancient cities and neighborhoods in another country, what connection do you have to them? My wife's extended family is from a place in Europe that has a passionate soccer following and none of them are really into it... the typical response I get from someone in this country is 'you like the style of play'. More on this in a second, but ...


I enjoy watching soccer matches but I agree that it is hard for an American to easily identify with a team far away for them. I personally like Man United a lot because I know one of the player's cousins (who lives in the U.S.) and some of the colorful personalities on the team like Giggs and Rooney. Also, Ferguson's reign of terror as coach was always amusing to read about... but with some of these players probably on the way out and Ferguson retiring, I have little connection to them at least compared to the cardinals who i root for in MLB. SO, i guess this point i do agree with you on.

as for style of play, the EPL is far more enjoyable as a whole to watch than the italian (or even worse) the spanish league where the guys play like girls i.e. little sissies flopping to the ground with the slightest contact. soccer is meant to be a physical sport and the EPL gets that. also, the EPL is a very balanced league... lot of parity. in la liga, there are two spanish teams who destroy everyone else and in italy, it's roughly the same. it's no fun watching a match when you know the outcome before its going to happen.

TontoKowalski {l Wrote}:2. The introduction of EPL soccer in this country is shameless product placement and marketing. Someone wealthy decided to sell soccer to a large, unsoccer'ed but sports-loving American environment and did so, with apparent success. But it's shameless. Now look, sports is a product, it's been a product for years, great. I recognize this. But sports in this country became a product because so many people loved the game(s). The sports love here existed before the product placement. The product-ifying wearies me. I hate this conference realignment. ESPN is completely unwatchable because they arent even selling sports anymore, they're selling ESPN.


part of the reason that the EPL is the most successful is due to the huge TV contacts in the UK, US, and around the world. it's the reason for the best stadiums, players, competitiveness, and quality of play. i agree that ESPN is dreadful and unwatchable but to compare the EPL to them is sinister. i despise ESPN and all it has to done to ruin athletics. i only watch it for games i want to see but i could never watch the rest of their shit programming. the EPL (and its predecessor) was huge in europe before the TV contracts and people love watch English league football. they always have for as long as the The English League has been around for the simple reason is that it's a great combination of foot skill, athleticism, intelligence, physicallity, etc.

TontoKowalski {l Wrote}:3. There's the EPL. There's a Spanish league, an Italian league, a German league. Other leagues. Then some subset of those plays each other. Periodically, teams are not in the majors anymore and go into the minors? This is a fucking lot of shit to keep track of, especially for a guy who wonders where Wales and Campbell went.


Relegation and promotion are an interesting system. I find it fascinating. I think there are something like ten levels of soccer leagues in england. and every year there is a contest in which every team in those leagues have a chance to become the best team in england (the FA cup). so, you have teams like Man United potentially playing an amateur or semi-pro team. and there are times when those semi-pro teams win. i think that is something that make soccer great. it's such a difficult game even for the best players in the world that if an underdog team plays well enough and smart enough they could just beat a giant. the closest thing we have to this is the ncaa tournament which everyone in the US loves.

as for the rest of the leagues, i cant really comment as I watch only EPL games and champions leagues games. the latter takes the best teams from each league based on the previous season and then they play each other to determine the best team. fwiw, the champ league final is this saturday.

TontoKowalski {l Wrote}:5. In addition to there being a lot of teams, players, leagues, and countries, there are a lot of songs. I don't like to sing. You wouldn't like me to sing near you, either. I can't sing. I can't carry a tune. Why is everyone singing? Why don't you all go join a choir or a boy band? The only song that should really be sung at a sports event is 'Who's your father, referee'. All this singing crap is really too much.


i don't like to sing either but i guess it's not much chanting then what we do at football and baseball games. i guess when you are as drunk watching the game as most people are that attend them it might make sense. i have never attended a EPL game in person so I would not know.

TontoKowalski {l Wrote}:6. This one comes from soccer fans from other countries: 'Football is BORING. A football game only averages 11 minutes of actual play. Soccer they never stop playing!' This, to me, is the most damning criticism of soccer and its fans: if something isn't happening AT ALL TIMES, the entire audience might change the channel to CSPAN or something. This is so outrageously stupid. I like chess. I'm not great at it, but I enjoy it as a hobby, as a quiet, intellectual way to pass the time, as a thing to do with my kids after Sunday dinner or in a blitz match. By the definition above, chess isn't exciting. In fact, chess is THRILLING if you have even a cursory understanding of it and guess what? There's not a lot of shit happening in a chess match. There isn't a lot of movement. Things aren't going up and down the board, really. And yet... it is high strategy and mind-bendingly awesome.


i think every sport has its own unique elements that make it entertaining. i will say that it's nice having the lack of commercials in a soccer match which is a far contrast to the nfl.

TontoKowalski {l Wrote}:7. 'If you like hockey, you'll like soccer. They're really similar.' This is almost the same as above but worth mentioning - anyone who says this knows nothing about hockey. Hockey has a ton of strategy and a lot of movement; soccer has seemingly no strategy and a lot of movement. In hockey, the goaltender can disproportionately affect outcomes. In soccer, this is not the case. In hockey, the personnel changes mean there is a strategy to timing and rotations. Hits and contact factor in. This is another thing I hear from Europeans and the truth is that they don't know anything about hockey if they say this.


there is a ton of movement in soccer and i think that's part of the strategy. i'mm not an expert here so i will let others more informed than me. making sure you are in the right place at the right time. i will say that i know a lot of former hockey guys that are too banged up to play hockey anymore and they pick up soccer quite well as the two are related. as for the goalie not having an impact, i completely disagree. tim howard is a beast. there are so many games the U.S. men's team should have lost because we werent that good but somehow he saved us. brad guzan, his backup, is another guy that's really top notch and he kept his shitty EPL team in a lot of games just because he made ridiculous saves.
HANSENPOST :shrug

Image
User avatar
hansen
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 19043
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Your Mom’s House
Karma: -2236

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby TobaccoRoadEagle on Mon May 20, 2013 2:01 pm

hansen {l Wrote}:
I enjoy watching soccer matches but I agree that it is hard for an American to easily identify with a team far away for them.


i stopped reading here when i realized that hansen isn't american and therefore represents all the things that no space hates about illegal immigrants
now in the street there is violence
and, and a lots of work to be done
no place to hang out our washing
and, and i can't blame all on the sun
good god we gonna rock down to electric avenue
and then we'll take it higher
User avatar
TobaccoRoadEagle
BC Guy
 
Posts: 24016
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:51 am
Location: tobaccoroad
Karma: 6074

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby twballgame9 on Mon May 20, 2013 2:05 pm

I stopped reading after I heard "shut up hansen" in 1000 different interweb voices. So early.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 34343
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2489

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby HustlinOwl on Mon May 20, 2013 2:26 pm

hansen {l Wrote}:
TontoKowalski {l Wrote}:I have had various friends and acquaintances try to get me into soccer the past few years - it felt like years ago, when people in my 8th grade class tried to get me into cigarettes because of how much they thought I would like it (family members died from lung cancer - I despise smoking and always have). I gave soccer more of a chance than I gave smoking in 8th grade (although in truth, perhaps I should have channeled my 8th grade self here). Here are some thoughts:

1. 'Tottenham/Chelsea/Man -U ais my favorite team' - this interests me. How did you choose a favorite team? These are from ancient cities and neighborhoods in another country, what connection do you have to them? My wife's extended family is from a place in Europe that has a passionate soccer following and none of them are really into it... the typical response I get from someone in this country is 'you like the style of play'. More on this in a second, but ...


I enjoy watching soccer matches but I agree that it is hard for an American to easily identify with a team far away for them. I personally like Man United a lot because I know one of the player's cousins (who lives in the U.S.) and some of the colorful personalities on the team like Giggs and Rooney. Also, Ferguson's reign of terror as coach was always amusing to read about... but with some of these players probably on the way out and Ferguson retiring, I have little connection to them at least compared to the cardinals who i root for in MLB. SO, i guess this point i do agree with you on.

as for style of play, the EPL is far more enjoyable as a whole to watch than the italian (or even worse) the spanish league where the guys play like girls i.e. little sissies flopping to the ground with the slightest contact. soccer is meant to be a physical sport and the EPL gets that. also, the EPL is a very balanced league... lot of parity. in la liga, there are two spanish teams who destroy everyone else and in italy, it's roughly the same. it's no fun watching a match when you know the outcome before its going to happen.

TontoKowalski {l Wrote}:2. The introduction of EPL soccer in this country is shameless product placement and marketing. Someone wealthy decided to sell soccer to a large, unsoccer'ed but sports-loving American environment and did so, with apparent success. But it's shameless. Now look, sports is a product, it's been a product for years, great. I recognize this. But sports in this country became a product because so many people loved the game(s). The sports love here existed before the product placement. The product-ifying wearies me. I hate this conference realignment. ESPN is completely unwatchable because they arent even selling sports anymore, they're selling ESPN.


part of the reason that the EPL is the most successful is due to the huge TV contacts in the UK, US, and around the world. it's the reason for the best stadiums, players, competitiveness, and quality of play. i agree that ESPN is dreadful and unwatchable but to compare the EPL to them is sinister. i despise ESPN and all it has to done to ruin athletics. i only watch it for games i want to see but i could never watch the rest of their shit programming. the EPL (and its predecessor) was huge in europe before the TV contracts and people love watch English league football. they always have for as long as the The English League has been around for the simple reason is that it's a great combination of foot skill, athleticism, intelligence, physicallity, etc.

TontoKowalski {l Wrote}:3. There's the EPL. There's a Spanish league, an Italian league, a German league. Other leagues. Then some subset of those plays each other. Periodically, teams are not in the majors anymore and go into the minors? This is a fucking lot of shit to keep track of, especially for a guy who wonders where Wales and Campbell went.


Relegation and promotion are an interesting system. I find it fascinating. I think there are something like ten levels of soccer leagues in england. and every year there is a contest in which every team in those leagues have a chance to become the best team in england (the FA cup). so, you have teams like Man United potentially playing an amateur or semi-pro team. and there are times when those semi-pro teams win. i think that is something that make soccer great. it's such a difficult game even for the best players in the world that if an underdog team plays well enough and smart enough they could just beat a giant. the closest thing we have to this is the ncaa tournament which everyone in the US loves.

as for the rest of the leagues, i cant really comment as I watch only EPL games and champions leagues games. the latter takes the best teams from each league based on the previous season and then they play each other to determine the best team. fwiw, the champ league final is this saturday.

TontoKowalski {l Wrote}:5. In addition to there being a lot of teams, players, leagues, and countries, there are a lot of songs. I don't like to sing. You wouldn't like me to sing near you, either. I can't sing. I can't carry a tune. Why is everyone singing? Why don't you all go join a choir or a boy band? The only song that should really be sung at a sports event is 'Who's your father, referee'. All this singing crap is really too much.


i don't like to sing either but i guess it's not much chanting then what we do at football and baseball games. i guess when you are as drunk watching the game as most people are that attend them it might make sense. i have never attended a EPL game in person so I would not know.

TontoKowalski {l Wrote}:6. This one comes from soccer fans from other countries: 'Football is BORING. A football game only averages 11 minutes of actual play. Soccer they never stop playing!' This, to me, is the most damning criticism of soccer and its fans: if something isn't happening AT ALL TIMES, the entire audience might change the channel to CSPAN or something. This is so outrageously stupid. I like chess. I'm not great at it, but I enjoy it as a hobby, as a quiet, intellectual way to pass the time, as a thing to do with my kids after Sunday dinner or in a blitz match. By the definition above, chess isn't exciting. In fact, chess is THRILLING if you have even a cursory understanding of it and guess what? There's not a lot of shit happening in a chess match. There isn't a lot of movement. Things aren't going up and down the board, really. And yet... it is high strategy and mind-bendingly awesome.


i think every sport has its own unique elements that make it entertaining. i will say that it's nice having the lack of commercials in a soccer match which is a far contrast to the nfl.

TontoKowalski {l Wrote}:7. 'If you like hockey, you'll like soccer. They're really similar.' This is almost the same as above but worth mentioning - anyone who says this knows nothing about hockey. Hockey has a ton of strategy and a lot of movement; soccer has seemingly no strategy and a lot of movement. In hockey, the goaltender can disproportionately affect outcomes. In soccer, this is not the case. In hockey, the personnel changes mean there is a strategy to timing and rotations. Hits and contact factor in. This is another thing I hear from Europeans and the truth is that they don't know anything about hockey if they say this.


there is a ton of movement in soccer and i think that's part of the strategy. i'mm not an expert here so i will let others more informed than me. making sure you are in the right place at the right time. i will say that i know a lot of former hockey guys that are too banged up to play hockey anymore and they pick up soccer quite well as the two are related. as for the goalie not having an impact, i completely disagree. tim howard is a beast. there are so many games the U.S. men's team should have lost because we werent that good but somehow he saved us. brad guzan, his backup, is another guy that's really top notch and he kept his shitty EPL team in a lot of games just because he made ridiculous saves.


tl;dr. Soccer sucks.
Shaven, not furred.
User avatar
HustlinOwl
Merkert Hall
 
Posts: 3855
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:58 pm
Location: At Work
Karma: 614

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby Bryn Mawr Eagle on Mon May 20, 2013 3:31 pm

2001Eagle {l Wrote}:For instance, although it pains me to admit it, I am am a Man United fan (the Mets fan in me despises the idea of rooting for a Yankee-like organization) and the reason is pretty simple. At the age of 7-8 after being plucked out of the AYSO league to play for a premier/travel team, I asked my coach why our team was called _____________ United.* The coach, who had played professionally in England, responded that it was a a name fashioned after Manchester United. I immediately found everything that I could about them at the school and town library, and received a book about the team's history for a bday present (long before the interwebs was a thing). I came to like Man U and was always excited to see a blurb about them in the Sunday sports editions of the Globe or NYT, however infrequently. Been a fan ever since.

*Descriptive place names have been omitted to avoid rocketcarrage.


Hey, that's great. You know, when I was 8 I played baseball for the my Little League's Reds. Funny thing though, to this day I don't give a shit about the Cincinatti Reds. And I never really did. Maybe that's because I understood even then that I wasn't really on the Cincinatti Reds. And I wasn't from Cincinatti. Nobody ever gave me a book about them though. Maybe that would have sealed the deal. Oh well.

I guesss soccer is just different. I also find the use of team names that include terms like "United" or initials like FC, FSV, etc., in American youth soccer teams' names to be annoying. That is all.
User avatar
Bryn Mawr Eagle
Higgins Hall
 
Posts: 5235
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 7:41 pm
Karma: 1134

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby TobaccoRoadEagle on Mon May 20, 2013 3:39 pm

Bryn Mawr Eagle {l Wrote}:... I also find the use of team names that include terms like "United" or initials like FC, FSV, etc., in American youth soccer teams' names to be annoying. That is all.

i understand. i saw a guy yesterday wearing a "tobaccoroad fc" shirt and i wanted to shoot him in the dick.
now in the street there is violence
and, and a lots of work to be done
no place to hang out our washing
and, and i can't blame all on the sun
good god we gonna rock down to electric avenue
and then we'll take it higher
User avatar
TobaccoRoadEagle
BC Guy
 
Posts: 24016
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:51 am
Location: tobaccoroad
Karma: 6074

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby 2001Eagle on Mon May 20, 2013 4:07 pm

Bryn Mawr Eagle {l Wrote}:
2001Eagle {l Wrote}:For instance, although it pains me to admit it, I am am a Man United fan (the Mets fan in me despises the idea of rooting for a Yankee-like organization) and the reason is pretty simple. At the age of 7-8 after being plucked out of the AYSO league to play for a premier/travel team, I asked my coach why our team was called _____________ United.* The coach, who had played professionally in England, responded that it was a a name fashioned after Manchester United. I immediately found everything that I could about them at the school and town library, and received a book about the team's history for a bday present (long before the interwebs was a thing). I came to like Man U and was always excited to see a blurb about them in the Sunday sports editions of the Globe or NYT, however infrequently. Been a fan ever since.

*Descriptive place names have been omitted to avoid rocketcarrage.


Hey, that's great. You know, when I was 8 I played baseball for the my Little League's Reds. Funny thing though, to this day I don't give a shit about the Cincinatti Reds. And I never really did. Maybe that's because I understood even then that I wasn't really on the Cincinatti Reds. And I wasn't from Cincinatti. Nobody ever gave me a book about them though. Maybe that would have sealed the deal. Oh well.

I guesss soccer is just different. I also find the use of team names that include terms like "United" or initials like FC, FSV, etc., in American youth soccer teams' names to be annoying. That is all.


maybe if you had gotten that book you would know how to spell Cincinnati.
Coach hard. Love hard.
User avatar
2001Eagle
Merkert Hall
 
Posts: 3040
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 3:26 pm
Karma: 123

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby Bryn Mawr Eagle on Mon May 20, 2013 4:16 pm

2001Eagle {l Wrote}:
Bryn Mawr Eagle {l Wrote}:
2001Eagle {l Wrote}:For instance, although it pains me to admit it, I am am a Man United fan (the Mets fan in me despises the idea of rooting for a Yankee-like organization) and the reason is pretty simple. At the age of 7-8 after being plucked out of the AYSO league to play for a premier/travel team, I asked my coach why our team was called _____________ United.* The coach, who had played professionally in England, responded that it was a a name fashioned after Manchester United. I immediately found everything that I could about them at the school and town library, and received a book about the team's history for a bday present (long before the interwebs was a thing). I came to like Man U and was always excited to see a blurb about them in the Sunday sports editions of the Globe or NYT, however infrequently. Been a fan ever since.

*Descriptive place names have been omitted to avoid rocketcarrage.


Hey, that's great. You know, when I was 8 I played baseball for the my Little League's Reds. Funny thing though, to this day I don't give a shit about the Cincinatti Reds. And I never really did. Maybe that's because I understood even then that I wasn't really on the Cincinatti Reds. And I wasn't from Cincinatti. Nobody ever gave me a book about them though. Maybe that would have sealed the deal. Oh well.

I guesss soccer is just different. I also find the use of team names that include terms like "United" or initials like FC, FSV, etc., in American youth soccer teams' names to be annoying. That is all.


maybe if you had gotten that book you would know how to spell Cincinnati.


You got me there. But give me a break, you know how long it took me to learn how to spell "Philadelphia" as a little kid? Plus, I grew up thinking the word "Eagles" was spelled "Iggles." I'm spelling challenged.
User avatar
Bryn Mawr Eagle
Higgins Hall
 
Posts: 5235
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 7:41 pm
Karma: 1134

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby TontoKowalski on Mon May 20, 2013 5:27 pm

hansen {l Wrote}:
part of the reason that the EPL is the most successful is due to the huge TV contacts in the UK, US, and around the world. it's the reason for the best stadiums, players, competitiveness, and quality of play. i agree that ESPN is dreadful and unwatchable but to compare the EPL to them is sinister. i despise ESPN and all it has to done to ruin athletics. i only watch it for games i want to see but i could never watch the rest of their shit programming. the EPL (and its predecessor) was huge in europe before the TV contracts and people love watch English league football. they always have for as long as the The English League has been around for the simple reason is that it's a great combination of foot skill, athleticism, intelligence, physicallity, etc.


Yeah... but I remember reading an article in 1993-ish about how the EPL was going to start marketing in the US. And they've succeeded, largely. It just feels like a deliberate introduction and a deliberate sale. It wasn't like 'hey there are all these people in the US who are dying for professional soccer', it was, 'let's market to a new audience' and let's face it, marketing is a hell of a thing.

hansen {l Wrote}:
there is a ton of movement in soccer and i think that's part of the strategy.


Do you know, I noted the same thing during my brief soccer watching period? A lot of movement. In fact, I realized eventually, the majority of the movement is Brownian! This was a true revelation and the crux of my dislike for soccer. If you aren't familiar with Brownian Motion, now's a good time to go look it up. Anyway, when one player has a soccer ball and another is attempting to defend him, were you to trace the movement of the ball with a pen, I'll bet the entire game becomes completely Brownian. Further, when a few players are cycling it around the spaces outside of the defensive areas around the goals, the movement of the ball is also largely Brownian. Occasionally, the ball squirts into a deterministic space where people are trying to make certain things happen. But these temporary deterministic spaces descend into either a conclusive end (goal, stop, out of bounds) or total chaos and more Brownian ball motion in a span of seconds.

Compare this to football - the only moments in football games that you would characterize as Brownian are 'broken plays' - interception returns, missed tackles (when a WR or RB speeds into space), or missed blocks (and someone comes plowing through the line). It's exciting when random things happen precisely because football is otherwise composed of a lot of determinism - sets, formations, ideas, plays, instructions, step counting, etc. It has pockets of Brownian randomness but is otherwise a showdown of intentions - one side wants to do X, the other wants to do Y. Who is going to impose their will? Which players are better at carrying out the plan? Which plan is better? Randomness in the game can alter outcomes but with soccer, I felt like the games were a whole lot of randomness and to the extent there was determinism, it was for arms race reasons - Team X spent a fucking shit-ton more than Y. Not unlike baseball. But it really felt mostly Brownian with a few moments of actual directed things occurring.

Anyway, point is, defining strategy for a game that's mostly random is a waste of time - the game's mostly random. Is there a strategy in soccer? I'm sure there are strategic principles but is it laid out beforehand, are the players programmed with it, or is it just two players recognizing opportunity in the moment for non-deterministic reasons? If the latter, well, that's actually sort of boring in the way that lavalamps are boring after a few minutes. Again, just my own thinking here - but when I retire, determining if ball movement in soccer matches is Brownian is something I'll fiddle around with.

(for the record, if you adjust hockey puck movement for the added randomness of a rubber disc skidding over ice, I'm betting that the movement is a lot less Brownian - simply because players are trying to get the puck into certain spaces, and when it's there, everyone's thinking the same thing - so the puck's movement is probably pseudorandom or something, but a hockey player seeing a puck in a certain spot can be relied upon to do one of the same two or three things every time - I doubt this is the case with soccer)
User avatar
TontoKowalski
Merkert Hall
 
Posts: 4425
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 9:20 pm
Karma: 2387

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby hansen on Mon May 20, 2013 5:50 pm

TontoKowalski {l Wrote}:
hansen {l Wrote}:
part of the reason that the EPL is the most successful is due to the huge TV contacts in the UK, US, and around the world. it's the reason for the best stadiums, players, competitiveness, and quality of play. i agree that ESPN is dreadful and unwatchable but to compare the EPL to them is sinister. i despise ESPN and all it has to done to ruin athletics. i only watch it for games i want to see but i could never watch the rest of their shit programming. the EPL (and its predecessor) was huge in europe before the TV contracts and people love watch English league football. they always have for as long as the The English League has been around for the simple reason is that it's a great combination of foot skill, athleticism, intelligence, physicallity, etc.


Yeah... but I remember reading an article in 1993-ish about how the EPL was going to start marketing in the US. And they've succeeded, largely. It just feels like a deliberate introduction and a deliberate sale. It wasn't like 'hey there are all these people in the US who are dying for professional soccer', it was, 'let's market to a new audience' and let's face it, marketing is a hell of a thing.

hansen {l Wrote}:
there is a ton of movement in soccer and i think that's part of the strategy.


Do you know, I noted the same thing during my brief soccer watching period? A lot of movement. In fact, I realized eventually, the majority of the movement is Brownian! This was a true revelation and the crux of my dislike for soccer. If you aren't familiar with Brownian Motion, now's a good time to go look it up. Anyway, when one player has a soccer ball and another is attempting to defend him, were you to trace the movement of the ball with a pen, I'll bet the entire game becomes completely Brownian. Further, when a few players are cycling it around the spaces outside of the defensive areas around the goals, the movement of the ball is also largely Brownian. Occasionally, the ball squirts into a deterministic space where people are trying to make certain things happen. But these temporary deterministic spaces descend into either a conclusive end (goal, stop, out of bounds) or total chaos and more Brownian ball motion in a span of seconds.

Compare this to football - the only moments in football games that you would characterize as Brownian are 'broken plays' - interception returns, missed tackles (when a WR or RB speeds into space), or missed blocks (and someone comes plowing through the line). It's exciting when random things happen precisely because football is otherwise composed of a lot of determinism - sets, formations, ideas, plays, instructions, step counting, etc. It has pockets of Brownian randomness but is otherwise a showdown of intentions - one side wants to do X, the other wants to do Y. Who is going to impose their will? Which players are better at carrying out the plan? Which plan is better? Randomness in the game can alter outcomes but with soccer, I felt like the games were a whole lot of randomness and to the extent there was determinism, it was for arms race reasons - Team X spent a fucking shit-ton more than Y. Not unlike baseball. But it really felt mostly Brownian with a few moments of actual directed things occurring.

Anyway, point is, defining strategy for a game that's mostly random is a waste of time - the game's mostly random. Is there a strategy in soccer? I'm sure there are strategic principles but is it laid out beforehand, are the players programmed with it, or is it just two players recognizing opportunity in the moment for non-deterministic reasons? If the latter, well, that's actually sort of boring in the way that lavalamps are boring after a few minutes. Again, just my own thinking here - but when I retire, determining if ball movement in soccer matches is Brownian is something I'll fiddle around with.

(for the record, if you adjust hockey puck movement for the added randomness of a rubber disc skidding over ice, I'm betting that the movement is a lot less Brownian - simply because players are trying to get the puck into certain spaces, and when it's there, everyone's thinking the same thing - so the puck's movement is probably pseudorandom or something, but a hockey player seeing a puck in a certain spot can be relied upon to do one of the same two or three things every time - I doubt this is the case with soccer)


If the game is played well, the ball at any instant should move in triangles between the various players over some varying distance. If you were to trace the ball over a long period of time, then yes the motion would appear random. But, at some instantaneous point in time or over some small interval of time, i would argue this would not be the case.

I think the unpredictability of the movement on the field and the various "tricks" that are possible with a soccer ball allow for creativity and difficulty for any defender. There is only so much you can do with a football... you tuck it and run, you throw, etc. but, when you are allowed (and there are definite advantages to using) any part of your body but your arms and hands, it creates tremendous opportunities for attackers and difficulties for defenders.

like i mentioned before, i never played soccer growing up really; i picked it up late in my 20s as a way to stay in shape, drink some beers, and meet some fit women. i was always fairly athletic, grew up spending most of my high school days playing basketball, but trying to learn soccer at a late age was still extremely difficult. it's impossible to appreciate the game until you play it. the speed at which the game moves is incredible even in my sunday beer league (then again maybe it's because i'm usually shitfaced before and afterwards). :D anyway, i highly encourage all the haters to play if nothing else as a way to stay in shape.
HANSENPOST :shrug

Image
User avatar
hansen
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 19043
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Your Mom’s House
Karma: -2236

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby HustlinOwl on Mon May 20, 2013 6:07 pm

TontoKowalski {l Wrote}:
hansen {l Wrote}:
part of the reason that the EPL is the most successful is due to the huge TV contacts in the UK, US, and around the world. it's the reason for the best stadiums, players, competitiveness, and quality of play. i agree that ESPN is dreadful and unwatchable but to compare the EPL to them is sinister. i despise ESPN and all it has to done to ruin athletics. i only watch it for games i want to see but i could never watch the rest of their shit programming. the EPL (and its predecessor) was huge in europe before the TV contracts and people love watch English league football. they always have for as long as the The English League has been around for the simple reason is that it's a great combination of foot skill, athleticism, intelligence, physicallity, etc.


Yeah... but I remember reading an article in 1993-ish about how the EPL was going to start marketing in the US. And they've succeeded, largely. It just feels like a deliberate introduction and a deliberate sale. It wasn't like 'hey there are all these people in the US who are dying for professional soccer', it was, 'let's market to a new audience' and let's face it, marketing is a hell of a thing.

hansen {l Wrote}:
there is a ton of movement in soccer and i think that's part of the strategy.


Do you know, I noted the same thing during my brief soccer watching period? A lot of movement. In fact, I realized eventually, the majority of the movement is Brownian! This was a true revelation and the crux of my dislike for soccer. If you aren't familiar with Brownian Motion, now's a good time to go look it up. Anyway, when one player has a soccer ball and another is attempting to defend him, were you to trace the movement of the ball with a pen, I'll bet the entire game becomes completely Brownian. Further, when a few players are cycling it around the spaces outside of the defensive areas around the goals, the movement of the ball is also largely Brownian. Occasionally, the ball squirts into a deterministic space where people are trying to make certain things happen. But these temporary deterministic spaces descend into either a conclusive end (goal, stop, out of bounds) or total chaos and more Brownian ball motion in a span of seconds.

Compare this to football - the only moments in football games that you would characterize as Brownian are 'broken plays' - interception returns, missed tackles (when a WR or RB speeds into space), or missed blocks (and someone comes plowing through the line). It's exciting when random things happen precisely because football is otherwise composed of a lot of determinism - sets, formations, ideas, plays, instructions, step counting, etc. It has pockets of Brownian randomness but is otherwise a showdown of intentions - one side wants to do X, the other wants to do Y. Who is going to impose their will? Which players are better at carrying out the plan? Which plan is better? Randomness in the game can alter outcomes but with soccer, I felt like the games were a whole lot of randomness and to the extent there was determinism, it was for arms race reasons - Team X spent a fucking shit-ton more than Y. Not unlike baseball. But it really felt mostly Brownian with a few moments of actual directed things occurring.

Anyway, point is, defining strategy for a game that's mostly random is a waste of time - the game's mostly random. Is there a strategy in soccer? I'm sure there are strategic principles but is it laid out beforehand, are the players programmed with it, or is it just two players recognizing opportunity in the moment for non-deterministic reasons? If the latter, well, that's actually sort of boring in the way that lavalamps are boring after a few minutes. Again, just my own thinking here - but when I retire, determining if ball movement in soccer matches is Brownian is something I'll fiddle around with.

(for the record, if you adjust hockey puck movement for the added randomness of a rubber disc skidding over ice, I'm betting that the movement is a lot less Brownian - simply because players are trying to get the puck into certain spaces, and when it's there, everyone's thinking the same thing - so the puck's movement is probably pseudorandom or something, but a hockey player seeing a puck in a certain spot can be relied upon to do one of the same two or three things every time - I doubt this is the case with soccer)


When I first read Brownian Motion I was thinking it's a racist term to kick it to the brown kid because he's a better soccer player than everyone else. I was wrong. Looking at the Wiki definition it reminds me that we've made incredible progress describing and harnessing the physical world around us, but at it's very basic physical root we still don't know what the fuck is going on.
Shaven, not furred.
User avatar
HustlinOwl
Merkert Hall
 
Posts: 3855
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:58 pm
Location: At Work
Karma: 614

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby MF73-Eleazar on Mon May 20, 2013 6:11 pm

Best stadiums are in Germany, as are the better crowds.

English teams have more money to spend.

Quite a few teams focus on playing defense and grind it out, irrespective of who is on the team (like the NYRangers), and some, like the bigger teams, sign plenty of attacking players to break the defensive teams. Some teams hoof the ball forward hoping that there's a few lucky bounces, some teams keep the ball on the ground and just pass pass pass. Think of dump and chase teams, and teams that aren't dump and chase.

Most folks I go to games with are hardcore Devils, Rangers and Isles fans, plus a few ex-Whalers fans, and they always tell me of the similarities of both hockey and soccer.

People like big front-running teams or leagues, happens here in the States all the time.
You what?
MF73-Eleazar
Cushing Hall
 
Posts: 2182
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 2:10 am
Location: New York City
Karma: -341

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby innocentbystander on Mon May 20, 2013 6:25 pm

TontoKowalski {l Wrote}:
hansen {l Wrote}:
part of the reason that the EPL is the most successful is due to the huge TV contacts in the UK, US, and around the world. it's the reason for the best stadiums, players, competitiveness, and quality of play. i agree that ESPN is dreadful and unwatchable but to compare the EPL to them is sinister. i despise ESPN and all it has to done to ruin athletics. i only watch it for games i want to see but i could never watch the rest of their shit programming. the EPL (and its predecessor) was huge in europe before the TV contracts and people love watch English league football. they always have for as long as the The English League has been around for the simple reason is that it's a great combination of foot skill, athleticism, intelligence, physicallity, etc.


Yeah... but I remember reading an article in 1993-ish about how the EPL was going to start marketing in the US. And they've succeeded, largely. It just feels like a deliberate introduction and a deliberate sale. It wasn't like 'hey there are all these people in the US who are dying for professional soccer', it was, 'let's market to a new audience' and let's face it, marketing is a hell of a thing.

hansen {l Wrote}:
there is a ton of movement in soccer and i think that's part of the strategy.


Do you know, I noted the same thing during my brief soccer watching period? A lot of movement. In fact, I realized eventually, the majority of the movement is Brownian! This was a true revelation and the crux of my dislike for soccer. If you aren't familiar with Brownian Motion, now's a good time to go look it up. Anyway, when one player has a soccer ball and another is attempting to defend him, were you to trace the movement of the ball with a pen, I'll bet the entire game becomes completely Brownian. Further, when a few players are cycling it around the spaces outside of the defensive areas around the goals, the movement of the ball is also largely Brownian. Occasionally, the ball squirts into a deterministic space where people are trying to make certain things happen. But these temporary deterministic spaces descend into either a conclusive end (goal, stop, out of bounds) or total chaos and more Brownian ball motion in a span of seconds.


this is excellent, + 5 tonto

i could never really put my finger on the reason why i found soccer so horrendously boring other than the lack of scoring, but i like your Brownian example better. i'm going to remember this post forever tonto. kick-ball keep-away is (by its very nature) boring and entirely un-American. i just don't enjoy seeing two guys dancing in some random-motion-marriage with a kick-ball in a multiple series of one-on-ones. its almost drab in its utter purposelessness.

on the field, I want to see advancement or degradation, an ultimate achievement based on territory or point scoring. i think that is part of the reason why i have lost so much interest in hockey over the last 20 years, checking and passing, blah. score more goals
Feminism: Eve eats ALL the apples, gives God the middle finder when He confronts her, and has the serpent serve Adam with an injunction ordering him to stay away from her AND to provide her food and shelter because he dragged her out of the Garden.
User avatar
innocentbystander
BC Guy
 
Posts: 21762
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 9:40 pm
Location: Pac-12 Hell
Karma: -3661

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby TontoKowalski on Tue May 21, 2013 8:17 am

ib,

Thank you! Every now and that my bizarre ideas about the universe resonate with truth and it's really satisfying, isn't it?

So, all kidding about dot net programming aside, at some point you have surely had to generate random numbers, and you have appreciated that most random number generators that come with programming languages are based on the clock and can therefore be reproduced exactly if you reset the clock, right? So they're not really random, they're pseudorandom - which is to say, they look random to us but with enough numbers, would not pass a battery of statistical tests for randomness (chi sq, etc). I still maintain that hockey puck movement is pseudorandom and soccer balls are Brownian. Hockey is the pr clock and soccer is Yarrow (I was part of a team that peer-reviewed Schneier's Yarrow years ago - it's a nice piece of work and we threw a lot of stuff at it).

Owl,

This is true. Exciting, isn't it? We cannot predict the particle's movements but we do know the source - heat! As heat from the origin of the universe moves around, the particles get pushed by minute frictions, pressures, differentials, etc. If the universe expands forever and dies a heat death, there won't be any more brownian motion. But until then, the heat moves things randomly. I wonder sometimes if you scaled back far enough to a great enough height, if the movements of our entire lives aren't seemingly Brownian, caused by our microscopic lives releasing all the heat we collect. That's a bigger project than I will have years in my retirement, probably.
User avatar
TontoKowalski
Merkert Hall
 
Posts: 4425
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 9:20 pm
Karma: 2387

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby twballgame9 on Tue May 21, 2013 8:32 am

HustlinOwl {l Wrote}:
TontoKowalski {l Wrote}:
hansen {l Wrote}:
part of the reason that the EPL is the most successful is due to the huge TV contacts in the UK, US, and around the world. it's the reason for the best stadiums, players, competitiveness, and quality of play. i agree that ESPN is dreadful and unwatchable but to compare the EPL to them is sinister. i despise ESPN and all it has to done to ruin athletics. i only watch it for games i want to see but i could never watch the rest of their shit programming. the EPL (and its predecessor) was huge in europe before the TV contracts and people love watch English league football. they always have for as long as the The English League has been around for the simple reason is that it's a great combination of foot skill, athleticism, intelligence, physicallity, etc.


Yeah... but I remember reading an article in 1993-ish about how the EPL was going to start marketing in the US. And they've succeeded, largely. It just feels like a deliberate introduction and a deliberate sale. It wasn't like 'hey there are all these people in the US who are dying for professional soccer', it was, 'let's market to a new audience' and let's face it, marketing is a hell of a thing.

hansen {l Wrote}:
there is a ton of movement in soccer and i think that's part of the strategy.


Do you know, I noted the same thing during my brief soccer watching period? A lot of movement. In fact, I realized eventually, the majority of the movement is Brownian! This was a true revelation and the crux of my dislike for soccer. If you aren't familiar with Brownian Motion, now's a good time to go look it up. Anyway, when one player has a soccer ball and another is attempting to defend him, were you to trace the movement of the ball with a pen, I'll bet the entire game becomes completely Brownian. Further, when a few players are cycling it around the spaces outside of the defensive areas around the goals, the movement of the ball is also largely Brownian. Occasionally, the ball squirts into a deterministic space where people are trying to make certain things happen. But these temporary deterministic spaces descend into either a conclusive end (goal, stop, out of bounds) or total chaos and more Brownian ball motion in a span of seconds.

Compare this to football - the only moments in football games that you would characterize as Brownian are 'broken plays' - interception returns, missed tackles (when a WR or RB speeds into space), or missed blocks (and someone comes plowing through the line). It's exciting when random things happen precisely because football is otherwise composed of a lot of determinism - sets, formations, ideas, plays, instructions, step counting, etc. It has pockets of Brownian randomness but is otherwise a showdown of intentions - one side wants to do X, the other wants to do Y. Who is going to impose their will? Which players are better at carrying out the plan? Which plan is better? Randomness in the game can alter outcomes but with soccer, I felt like the games were a whole lot of randomness and to the extent there was determinism, it was for arms race reasons - Team X spent a fucking shit-ton more than Y. Not unlike baseball. But it really felt mostly Brownian with a few moments of actual directed things occurring.

Anyway, point is, defining strategy for a game that's mostly random is a waste of time - the game's mostly random. Is there a strategy in soccer? I'm sure there are strategic principles but is it laid out beforehand, are the players programmed with it, or is it just two players recognizing opportunity in the moment for non-deterministic reasons? If the latter, well, that's actually sort of boring in the way that lavalamps are boring after a few minutes. Again, just my own thinking here - but when I retire, determining if ball movement in soccer matches is Brownian is something I'll fiddle around with.

(for the record, if you adjust hockey puck movement for the added randomness of a rubber disc skidding over ice, I'm betting that the movement is a lot less Brownian - simply because players are trying to get the puck into certain spaces, and when it's there, everyone's thinking the same thing - so the puck's movement is probably pseudorandom or something, but a hockey player seeing a puck in a certain spot can be relied upon to do one of the same two or three things every time - I doubt this is the case with soccer)


When I first read Brownian Motion I was thinking it's a racist term to kick it to the brown kid because he's a better soccer player than everyone else. I was wrong. Looking at the Wiki definition it reminds me that we've made incredible progress describing and harnessing the physical world around us, but at it's very basic physical root we still don't know what the fuck is going on.


Second this notion.

Also second that soccer sucks because completely random is boring. And the idea that passing around a triangle sometimes when it doesn't get messed up all the time is "strategy" is absurd.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 34343
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2489

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby Dick Rosenthal on Tue May 21, 2013 10:48 am

I'd just like to stand up for kids with ADHD. I know many of them who absolutely despise soccer. The rise of soccer can be blamed on the general wussyness of the decaying society in which we live. Kids with frontal lobe issues are not the problem. Apparently, there is considerable scientific literature that supports the idea that kids with ADHD excel at contact sports because the collisions satisfy certain sensory needs.
Dick Rosenthal
Higgins Hall
 
Posts: 4985
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 10:39 pm
Karma: 395

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby Endless Mike on Tue May 21, 2013 10:51 am

I actually enjoy getting up early on Saturday mornings and watching the EPL while I have my coffee and breakfast. Not because I particularly care about any team or about soccer, but it's just something soothing to watch while I wake up. My friends and I keep saying that some weekend we're going to head over to Phoenix Landing or PJ Ryan's and do some morning drinking with real soccer hooligans, but I don't think it interests me enough to do all that on a weekend morning just for soccer. A big BC football or Patriots game, sure.

I also never understood how people could get so attached to a team they have no actual connection with, so that's another reason I never got into it. I can't bring myself to care about any of these foreign clubs.

I do enjoy the World Cup, and seeing the US win at something the Eurotrash assholes hold so dear is great. I'm also happy when the Revs do well.
User avatar
Endless Mike
Lyons Hall
 
Posts: 8489
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 6:02 pm
Karma: 1613

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby MF73-Eleazar on Tue May 21, 2013 12:08 pm

Endless Mike {l Wrote}:
I do enjoy the World Cup, and seeing the US win at something the Eurotrash assholes hold so dear is great. I'm also happy when the Revs do well.


You can blame Kraft as to why they aren't doing well anymore.
You what?
MF73-Eleazar
Cushing Hall
 
Posts: 2182
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 2:10 am
Location: New York City
Karma: -341

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby Endless Mike on Tue May 21, 2013 12:45 pm

MF73-Eleazar {l Wrote}:
Endless Mike {l Wrote}:
I do enjoy the World Cup, and seeing the US win at something the Eurotrash assholes hold so dear is great. I'm also happy when the Revs do well.


You can blame Kraft as to why they aren't doing well anymore.



Are they still trying to build their own stadium on the Orange Line in Somerville?
User avatar
Endless Mike
Lyons Hall
 
Posts: 8489
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 6:02 pm
Karma: 1613

Re: Everything about Soccer Sucks

Postby MF73-Eleazar on Tue May 21, 2013 1:31 pm

Endless Mike {l Wrote}:
MF73-Eleazar {l Wrote}:
Endless Mike {l Wrote}:
I do enjoy the World Cup, and seeing the US win at something the Eurotrash assholes hold so dear is great. I'm also happy when the Revs do well.


You can blame Kraft as to why they aren't doing well anymore.



Are they still trying to build their own stadium on the Orange Line in Somerville?


No idea. I think Nickerson would be better.
You what?
MF73-Eleazar
Cushing Hall
 
Posts: 2182
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 2:10 am
Location: New York City
Karma: -341

PreviousNext

Return to Shea Field

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

Untitled document