I haven't been following the Euro '08 tournament at all, but I did watch Turkey-Germany yesterday intrigued by the prospect of ethnic conflict. What a match! It's my sense that soccer isn't typically that thrilling, but it was certainly enough to sell me on watching Spain-Russia this afternoon. I have some Spanish ancestry (I think my father's father's father was born in Spain before emigrating to Cuba) but I'm a serious Russophile despite that country's unfortunate habit of putting dill in everything, so I'll be rooting for them.
« The Base | Main | Your Liberal Media »
Thursday Soccer Blogging
26 Jun 2008 02:16 pm
Comments (55)
I hope you watched the replay on ESPN Classic last night rather than the game live, where I understand they lost the feed for a few minutes (and a couple goals) at the end.
I, too, watched that game, or at least as much of it as I could see without access to Swiss local television. The game's end was awesome.
Real Americans don't watch soccer.
Shame the Turks are out of the tournament. Every one of their games has been an absolute thrill-ride.
Don't be hating on dill. Dill is the only reason to eat Russian food. (Well, that and the need for something to soak up all that vodka.)
Although I generally disdain ethnic nationalism, the soccer pitch is one place in the world where it is mandatory. Therefore, you are a blood traitor. Viva España!
Never understood how someone interested in sports could engage in a conversation about soccer. How are the two related?
The whole tournament has been fantastic, you've missed a sporting treat. Russia beating the highly-favored Dutch was something to see.
As a person of German ancestry, I've tended to cheer for Germany in soccer pretty loudly. Because I'm also a Jew of German ancestry, this has caused me to receive criticism from some fellow Jews (particularly non-fellow Germans). I'm not sure what to make of the situation. My ancestors certainly considered themselves Germans -- I even have a relative who won an Iron Cross in WWI. Then again, there was, you know, the thing that happened.
But then again, we German Jews aren't really in a unique situation are we? I mean, Matt's choices are Spain and Russia. That's sort of out of the frying pan and into the other frying pan.
where I understand they lost the feed for a few minutes (and a couple goals) at the end.
Everyone lost the feed (thunderstorms): the BBC switched to its radio commentary during the blackouts, but that missed some of the craziness at the end.
It's been a fantastic tournament. The Turks nearly pulled it off, in spite of suspensions and injuries. The Russians have shown tenacity and great sweeping attacking skills -- and teamwork has mattered more than individual stars. And yet the bloody Germans might just do what the Germans tend to do.
In other news, Steve Nash organised a kickabout in Chinatown yesterday with Thierry Henry, Claudio Reyna, Robbie Fowler, Steve McManaman, Jason Kidd, Leandro Barbosa, and a hilariously handball-prone Baron Davis. Lotsa video and photos on the web.
I really shouldn't go down this road yet again but I will never understand why Americans will happily sit through games of Football/Baseball/Basketball that can take over three hours to play and there are long stretches when there is literally nothing happening on the field, and then turn around and say soccer is boring.
Ethnic conflict?
It's my sense that soccer isn't typically that thrilling...
That game was just nerve-wrecking for this German supporter. :) Since Turkey was obviously the better team.
For thrilling games you should have watched the Dutch games especially their first two games.
Detleft, haven't Germany been "the poorer team" in all of their major wins? In '54, Hungary were "obviously the better team," in '74, the Netherlands were "obviously the better team," in '90 Argentina were "obviously the better team," in Euro '96 the Czech Republic were "obviously the better team," in WC 2002 Germany got to the finals ahead of many "obviously better teams" and might well have pulled it out if Michael Ballack hadn't been suspended, in WC 2006 Germany beat several "obviously better teams."
Germany are the Pete Sampras of soccer. They win and win and win as long as they can head the ball or stretch a match to PKs, no matter what else is wrong with their game (cf. Sampras going to sleep on all his non-service games and still winning).
Well, LondonLee, I'm fairly certain marathons last around 2 1/2 hours and there is constantly action in those as well. Just because people are constantly moving doesn't mean its exciting. And I like soccer. You're just going to have come up with a better reason why Americans don't get it...
In other news, Steve Nash organised a kickabout in Chinatown yesterday with Thierry Henry, Claudio Reyna, Robbie Fowler, Steve McManaman, Jason Kidd, Leandro Barbosa, and a hilariously handball-prone Baron Davis.
I was there!
It was a mob scene, but lots of fun. People were climbing trees and the fence around the park, standing on cars, etc., to see. Jozy Altidore and Solomon Kalou were also there, as well as (completely out of shape) ESPN basketball writer Marc Stein.
Deutchland, Deutchland, uber alles!!!
Yes, this has been a fantastic tournament so far. The football has been excellent. I hate to say this, but it is probably true, any tournament without England is much better.
About German/Turkish ethnic conflicts, I don't think this is as big a deal as it used to be. Several of the Turkish national players play in the Bundesliga (as do several of the Croatian players). Also, I have a friend who was born in Turkey and raised in Germany, and now lives in the US. He said that the attitudes of most Turkish/Germans was, "we'll win, no matter who wins." I don't know how the Germans feel. But I am quite sure that there would be a lot more emotion if Germany was to play the Netherlands, than when Germany plays Turkey.
As for the final, I think that Die Mannschaft can beat either Spain or Russia. It really depends on what German squad decides to show up (if they play like they did against Portugal, they will win, if they play like they did against Croatia, they will lose.).
In other news, Steve Nash organised a kickabout in Chinatown yesterday
Are we to assume by default this was Chinatown in Manhattan? There are several, you know.
OK, I admit, I'm just bitter I wasn't there.
goal spain!
rus v. esp - so far, esp in complete control.
Some people are TiVo-ing the game, you know.
WC 2002 Germany got to the finals ahead of many "obviously better teams."
[cough]handballlonthegoalline[/cough]
WC 2002 Germany got to the finals ahead of many "obviously better teams."
[cough]handballlonthegoalline[/cough]
final: Germany vs. Spain. Book it. (But then, I originally had Holland vs Portugal in the final, so what do I know?)
Well, LondonLee, I'm fairly certain marathons last around 2 1/2 hours and there is constantly action in those as well. Just because people are constantly moving doesn't mean its exciting.
OK, soccer's the only sport I play, I'm an absolute fanatic about it, but yes, it's true, it's not always gripping to watch. But then, neither is any sport! They can all be snoozers at times. Even Nascar -- perhaps especially Nascar -- speed notwithstanding.
But what makes soccer superior for me as a TV-spectator sport -- even in an otherwise-utterly-dull match -- is the lack of commercial breaks. For fifty minutes at a time, you can almost forget that the point of that electric box in your living room is to sell you shit you don't need, and just enjoy some amazing athleticism.
You're just going to have come up with a better reason why Americans don't get it...
There's no single reason. There are several and all fairly obvious:
a) Some people have simply *decided* not to like it as a way of asserting Americanness.
b) Not enough scoring
c) Ridiculous physical proportions are not required, and indeed are generally disadvantageous
d) Not enough people over a certain age have experience playing it, so don't appreciate the fitness, skills and tactics involved. This is changing.
My point was I don't understand why Americans don't get soccer (football!), all can think of is the rhythm of the game is different to the stop and start of US sports and they hate it because it doesn't allow them as many opportunities to go and get a beer.
What Al said, I'm recording the game today to watch tonight. No spoilers please.
all can think of is the rhythm of the game is different
If by that you mean most American's aren't fascinated by the prospect of a nil-nil draw, or the many 1-nil matches, then you would be right.
There are too many other options that provide much more excitement. But I wouldn't be surprised if ESPN2 - despite the 2:30 time slot - was getting fairly decent ratings for Euro2008. I think the major tournament soccer audience is growing in America - this obviously wouldn't count anything involving MLS.
Having said that, anyone catch the first leg of the final of the Copa Libertadores between LDU Quito and Flimunense on Fox Sports en Espanol last night?
Just me?
Amazing match. LDUQ took it 4-2. Second leg is next Wednsday night.
I wouldn't be surprised if ESPN2 - despite the 2:30 time slot - was getting fairly decent ratings for Euro2008.
Even though they've based their commentary team in Bristol rather than Austria-Switzerland, they've acquitted themselves well. Bringing in Andy Gray from Sky as a ringer was a smart move.
There's still not enough analysis, but there's none of the condescension and dumbassedness that Disney Sport brought to the World Cup. I hope they don't fuck it up by trying to dumb down coverage of the final on ABC this Sunday.
(Nice work, Al. No, really.)
Other thing standing between Americans & soccer, based on a sample of one: Diving!
There are too many other options that provide much more excitement. But I wouldn't be surprised if ESPN2 - despite the 2:30 time slot - was getting fairly decent ratings for Euro2008.
through the group stages the euro matches were rating 60-80% higher than the typical programming in that timeslot
sunday should be a good soccer day on abc, LA-DC lead in, spain-germany for the main course
Pseudonymous, you're right -- Andy Gray has been an awesome addition.
People who don't like soccer have personal problems. Fact.
I am a very late convert to the sport having been brought to it by my son's utter fanaticism, but I have come to totally love it. I've seen a couple of the better European sides live in the last few years and the notion that the game is dull just leaves me baffled.
One of the things I truly enjoy in my old age is the complete absence of time outs and other delays. You know how long the damn game is going to be, there is always action of some kind occurring, and then the game is over. Two hours of perfection. Baseball, by contrast, seems to be becoming endless -- and I consider myself a fan.
all can think of is the rhythm of the game is different to the stop and start of US sports and they hate it because it doesn't allow them as many opportunities to go and get a beer.
Whereas the average English soccer fan would never dream of touching a drop of alcohol during a match, or using the game as an excuse to go berserk.
I like soccer, and often have to defend it from attacks by Americans. A fair amount of the opposition seems to be based on the (correct) suspicion that European soccer fans consider themselves superior to American fans of American sports.
It doesn't help the cause of American soccer fans to have Englishmen showing up to argue that Americans don't like soccer because they're a bunch of alcoholic morons. It's not only false, it's also laughably hypocritical given the nationwide panic that seizes any country when the English national team shows up trailing its mob of drunken hooligans.
I'm an ignorant American who normally only pays attention when it's the World Cup, but working in a lab with European post docs has caused me to watch on the weekends at least. I like the game a lot and find it to be quite exciting, but I just can't get into MLS because it seems so minor league... and I can only muster to support the blind enthusiasm to randomly pick a team to support every couple of years.
I don't like those arguments either, JB. When I talked upthread about the lack of analysis, and I think that's far more important.
American sports fans are generally stat-heads, and in spite of OPTA's best efforts, it's hard to break a football match down into numbers. What it needs are replays and discussions of tactics, producers who can create packages to illustrate them, and on-screen talent with the nous to talk smartly about them.
(I've watched the NFL sporadically for nearly 30 years, and I still don't know the difference between a bootleg and play action. It's something the play-by-play guys assume you already know.)
Gray has been a useful addition precisely because he does tactical breakdowns during the English season at Sky, and would have been twiddling his thumbs otherwise, since the rights for big international competitions go to the terrestrial broadcasters.
Trouble is, there's pressure to fill up the half-time and post-match minutes with commercials to compensate for taking no breaks during each half, and that only leaves time for a couple of highlight replays and some superficial chatter.
All that said, ESPN has come on leaps and bounds, even since 2006, pushed in part by the competition from Fox Soccer Channel and GOL TV (not to mention the Spanish-language networks) and the development of a savvier audience.
Whereas the average English soccer fan would never dream of touching a drop of alcohol during a match,....
Of course, English fans watch games in bars. This allows them to lean over and shout "Oi! Another Stella!" without taking their eyes off the game.
I've watched the NFL sporadically for nearly 30 years, and I still don't know the difference between a bootleg and play action.
Bootleg: QB fakes a handoff inside, then runs around the outside of the line.
Play-action: QB fakes a handoff inside, then drops back and throws a pass.
The combination of those two moves -- QB runs to the outside, then throws -- is called a "rollout".
JB,
I am going to have to disagree with you.
It is not the fact that European soccer fans think they are better than American soccer fans, it is just that every time there is a thread about soccer, or any discussion about soccer, someone (almost always an American) has to show up and say either, "Soccer is boring," or "Soccer is not a real sport." It really gets on your nerves after a while. And I say this as someone who loves sports - American and European.
Another thing about hooliganism. Hooliganism is a different beast entirely. Soccer hooligans are not interested in the game itself, they are just people looking for a punch up. A lot of those people do not actually attend or watch the games.
One final thing. Having known a lot of Europeans, I have never met a European soccer fan who thought he was better than an American sports fan. However, living in California (the Bay Area), I have met LOTS of sports fans from the East Coast, the Midwest, Texas, and the South who thought they were far superior to the sports fans of California.
JB,
I am going to have to disagree with you.
It is not the fact that European soccer fans think they are better than American soccer fans, it is just that every time there is a thread about soccer, or any discussion about soccer, someone (almost always an American) has to show up and say either, "Soccer is boring," or "Soccer is not a real sport." It really gets on your nerves after a while. And I say this as someone who loves sports - American and European.
I don't disagree with you; I was about to leap to the defense of soccer against its American detractors when I got sidetracked into a defense of American sports and sports fans against their European detractors. As a guy who likes soccer, baseball, rugby, American football, etc., I think the whole, "which game is best/which fans are best" thing is tedious. I hope soccer continues to catch on in the US in part because its success will minimize the number of silly cultural/nationalist insult-fests that discussions of soccer tend to incite.
And, since I contributed to that kind of name-calling upthread, I include myself as part of the problem. I'm working on it.
American sports fans are generally stat-heads, and in spite of OPTA's best efforts, it's hard to break a football match down into numbers. What it needs are replays and discussions of tactics, producers who can create packages to illustrate them, and on-screen talent with the nous to talk smartly about them.
One of the best (tackle) football shows I've seen (don't know if ESPN is still doing it) had Ron Jaworski doing pre-game analysis where he'd break down offensive and defensive formations and tactics, go through plays in slo-mo to explain why they worked or didn't work, etc. It seems like that sort of approach could be profitably applied to American soccer broadcasts.
I also think a lot of it is just social. I'm a big sports fan but I find it hard to watch any sport by myself; I like to be with a group of people who are into it, or at least with a few folks who know the game. I got into soccer mostly because a former colleague of mine is an avid fan and the game became A LOT more interesting when he could explain to me, in ways that went beyond the superficial, what was going on. I don't think there's some great cultural barrier that needs to be breached; once a certain critical mass is reached soccer will become a popular spectator sport in the US.
The best thing that could happen for American soccer may be having an American player acknowledged--by Americans AND Europeans--as a genuine superstar in the English Premiership or on one of the high-profile European teams like Barcelona or Real Madrid. One stereotype that's true is that Americans like winners, and they know that the MLS champions and the best MLS players are still not the best in the world. A player who'd give American fans bragging rights in Europe would be a big help.
Sorry, Matthew, for your non-Russian ancestry. Outstanding victory for Spain. The Russians were scared to death during the whole match. We defeated Berlusconi's and Putin's teams with an almost-Brazilian way of playing.
a couple of quick points about hooliganism, since that's the only (of many possible) topics in this thread i have time to react to.
first, it's very old school to worry about brit soccer hooligans; actually, the british problem is much smaller nowadays, and to the best of my knowledge, the biggest problems are dutch (and, of course, various italian fascists).
and second, as someone said, they're not there for the soccer! a beautifully written participant observer account is bill buford's "among the thugs," written while buford was granta's london editor in the '80s, during which time he grew fascinated by, and spent considerable time with, various british hooligans: it's quite remarkable.
Why soccer becomes so popular that even Presidents and Kings come and support their teams play? You will certainly see them at major tournaments. these are my comments.
Soccer is easy to play yet difficult to master. This is a kind of addicting game to play in our PC, simple easy cheap to start but vast expansion and scope and multiplayer and money.
As a show, soccer has a lot of handsome and well balanced body and very-rich players-celebs (thats why a lot of girls watch soccer ). The soccer players are like our common neighbors, tall or short, but with strong, energetic, cute or handsome appearances.
TV coverage has a strong effect. We can see acrobatic and dramatic slow motions, we can see their fine faces closely. It is an entertainment show.
Depending on the team, for good teams, there are many acrobatic action, team working strategies and personal skill, many unpredictable surprises, variations, tragedy, injuries, etc.
Perhaps the most important factor is because there are many chances for supporters to participate. The arena itself are giant stadiums, full of wild supporters. Imagine that if we are inside a crowd of 20.000 fans. it is much like a battle. How exhilarating as we join a celebration and proud ourselves as a nation. That's a lot of fun for everyone to participate in. We have seen Turkey Prime Minister and Germany Chancellor leaping and hugging.
That's all that give soccer the number one sport around the world excepting Americans who call their no-foot ball as football and basketball full of giants .. ops sorry
American in Berlin here. Love the game to death, but what really puts it over the top is the communal aspect. For the last 2 weeks, every time a game has been on, every single restaurant, bar, café, beer garden, etc. has had a screen set up outside, so that every 10 feet you're confronted with people glued to the tournament. From my apartment, there's no mistaking the roars that go up all over the city when a goal has been scored. After the match, fireworks, citizens of the winning country driving around honking with flags flying out of the window. I live in Kreuzberg, a.k.a. Little Istanbul, and the Turkish wins - all last minute and excruciatingly dramatic - were explosions of joy. Germany-Turkey turned into a big street party at the end. There was a nice photo series in the Spiegel that captured the vibe: http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/0,5538,32816,00.html
It's really the perfect summer-in-the-city event.
Soccer is great to play, but difficult to make interesting on television precisely because you don't get the breaks in the action as in all of the other major sports. The slow stretches where you know not much is happening in American football and baseball are perfect for taking a break from the TV to do a chore, zone out, talk to someone else, or break for a commercial. With Soccer, a goal can happen at any time and one goal can well decide the game, so if you take a break you are liable to miss the decisive play of the game.
By contrast, American football is perfect for watching on television but its difficult to just round up some people and play. A "pick up" football game will involve so many rules changes that its a different game from what you see on TV.
Basketball and baseball are in between these two extremes, with basketball being easier to get a game together but more boring on TV than baseball.
The most popular team sports internationally are soccer, basketball, then after a big gap baseball, while American football is pretty much only played in the US (ignoring the Canadian version). In the US, football is the most popular and soccer the least popular team sport, with baseball being more consistently popular than basketball, or at least less dependent on momentary stars. I don't think this is an accident.
"Soccer is great to play, but difficult to make interesting on television precisely because you don't get the breaks in the action as in all of the other major sports."
C'mon, it's interesting enough for quite a few people; the 2006 World Cup had a total cumulative television audience of 26 billion. But you are absolutely right that it is difficult to find a good place for commercials, which annoys tv networks a lot. They have to cram all the ads in the halftime break, but if they do that everybody stops watching. So they still need to come up with some good content for those very precious fifteen minutes, to prevent audiences from changing the channel.
I can do you one better. I watched Turkey-Germany İN ISTANBUL. Whıle getting drunk wıth a bunch of Turks. There were fıreworks over the cıty for each goal, and everyone was admırably upbeat after the loss. Obvıously, Turkey dıd quıte well ın the tournament.
Russıa looked awful last nıght. I haven't watched the other matches before I got to Istanbul. How'd they get so far?
"It doesn't help the cause of American soccer fans to have Englishmen showing up to argue that Americans don't like soccer because they're a bunch of alcoholic morons."
It was a joke!
Like adlsad said above us foreigners (though I live in the US) do get a bit snarky on these internet chats about soccer when the inevitable xenophobic American shows up to declare that soccer is only played and enjoyed by pinko pansies.
And I would have thought it was the lack of commercial breaks that made it better to watch on TV than American sports. Those continuous interruptions can get very annoying.
How did you like the lack of time outs, and the nearly zero amount of coaching needed once the match began?
The one thing that I think would help soccer catch on in the US (like world soccer really cares), is more flexible subs. I think the fact that players are more or less stuck out there for two hours with only a half-time break leads to a more conservative game. Combine that with the fact that soccer is tilted so that scoring is very difficult and you've got a recipe for some boring defensive games. They're about as exciting as pitching duels are in baseball.
If I had a nickel for every time an American friend tried to kill my buzz with, "Yeah, but 0-0 draws are sooooo boring" ... In the 30 games of this tournament to date, there have been 2 0-0's (wet blanket Italians, inept French). In the last two German games alone, a total of 10 goals were scored.
Admittedly, this tournament has been an unusual and delightful blend of terrible defense and teams committed to attacking at all costs. Normally, as someone already mentioned, the ratio of exciting games to boring ones is about the same as in other sports. Every year, I try to stay up until 2:00 a.m. Sunday night to watch the Super Bowl, and historically I've only succeeded when the game is a dog ... got it right this year though!
I began watching soccer when the NHL tried to destroy itself a few years back.
It is an extraordinary game, and thoroughly addicting. I especially enjoy watching the EPL matches. The action is fast paced, the crowds are thoroughly into the game, and the commentating is exceptional. A match is over in two hours which, relative to the marathon rate at which NFL or MLB games are played, is extremely quick.
To the issue of scoring, I would only add this (and someone better w/ statistics may be able to debunk this theory rather quickly), if a touchdown in football counted for one point as opposed to six, would the score lines in the average NFL game look much different than the lines in the average EPL match? I think not.
"My point was I don't understand why Americans don't get soccer"
I used to love watching "Soccer made in Germany" with Toby Charles. It was a one hour show that dedicated about 45 minutes to air a condensed game.
Then, I decided to watch real games. It was horrible. I can't understand why both teams would want to stall so much. Stalling should either be an advantage for one side or the other, but every game I saw, both teams stalled.
That pretty much killed it for me.
It's amazing how every tim soccer comes up people feel compelled to make the same tired points we've been hearing for 30 years. The impression one gets is that both American soccer fans and American soccer haters are incredibly provincial people, as are the idiotic Europeans who still think it's clever to point out that we don't use our feet in American football.if you don't have something to say about the actual tournament just shut up. Please.
Like adlsad said above us foreigners (though I live in the US) do get a bit snarky on these internet chats about soccer when the inevitable xenophobic American shows up to declare that soccer is only played and enjoyed by pinko pansies.
Fair enough, mea culpa for contributing to the insult-fest.
Russıa looked awful last nıght. I haven't watched the other matches before I got to Istanbul. How'd they get so far?
I've watched quite a few of these matches and I think the first half of Russia-Spain was the worst play I've seen in the tournament. I have to believe a lot of it had to do with the heavy rain.
Yesterday the Russians looked nothing like the team that beat the Dutch. All I can think is, they may have been worn down by a combination of Spain's ball-control and the fact that the conditions in the first half were more conducive to mud wrestling than to soccer. It seemed like the Dutch played a more wide-open game, got burned early, and that gave the Russians some confidence. It seemed like once Spain went up a goal the Russians wilted.
Comments closed July 10, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
Not just dill, sour cream and dill in everything!
(really, though, if you were a friend of Russia you'd learn some more about it and not be so supportive of the bad people/programs there. I sometimes get the feeling your impression is that Russians are just too dumb for democracy since otherwise you'd certainly not be so supportive of Putin as you have been.)
Posted by matt (not the famous one) | June 26, 2008 2:33 PM