Sometimes it’s hard being a sports fan.
Sure, there are the thrilling games, the transcendent moments, and the larger-than-life performances that bring us together as fans.
But inevitably, these hilltop experiences lead only to the valleys of sports fanship. In these times we search for the next great athlete, the next indomitable underdog, or the next phenom waiting to break out.
My recent mountaintop experience came, as we discussed here over the past few weeks, with the European soccer championship. I fell in love with the spunky spirit of the Turks as they rallied to one impossible comeback win after another; I marveled at the tremendous athleticism of Lukas Podolski, David Villa, Andrei Arshavin, and so many others; I looked forward to the championship match like a kid waiting for Christmas.
And now that it’s over, I’m stuck here in sports limbo. So where do I go to find that next great sports connection?
I’ve got a few ideas, but I still can’t decide which sports experience I’m going to sink myself into next. I’m not talking about the “Big 3” mainstream sports, the NFL, MLB or the NBA; I want to find a so-called “fringe” sport and find out what makes it great. And hopefully, I’ll find the top of the sports mountain in the process.
Let’s take a look at the options, in no particular order:
Soccer
We’ve talked a lot about soccer lately, so we might as well tackle it right up front.
Pros: It’s a classic game. Every country besides the U.S. has a storied history in the sport, and that history carries over into so many facets of the game. Good play requires a set of very specific skills, and the smallest mistake can be the difference between winning and losing. When it’s done right, soccer is really fun to watch. And there’s also Hope Solo.
Cons: It’s not always done right. Watching a soccer match between two lackluster teams is bad enough, but it gets even worse when a good team takes on a bad team. Because it’s incredibly difficult to score, a two-goal lead usually means game over. Plus, there are a lot of weird rules and quasi-rules that can get confusing. And there’s also Franck Ribery.
Conclusion: International soccer is great, but the MLS is another thing. Let’s see what else is out there.
Hockey
Specifically, the NHL, which used to be part of the mainstream but has fallen into the second tier of sports.
Pros: Like soccer, it’s an extremely difficult game to master, and the players who are great are exceedingly fun to watch. Rising stars such as Sidney Crosby, Alex Ovechkin, Andrei Kostitsyn, and Marc-Andre Fleury give new fans plenty of opportunities to find a team to follow. If nothing else, it’s cool to watch the fights.
Cons: Like soccer, there are a few too many odd rules, although the league has taken steps to clear some of them up. Also like soccer, there are a lot of names that look like a box of Alpha-Bits spilled on the back of a jersey, making it hard for kids in the school yard to have to yell out things like “Oh yeah? Well I’m Maxim Balmochnykh of the Anaheim Ducks!”
Conclusion: Hockey certainly fills the hours in a place where it snows for eight months a year, but when you live in Southern California, it just doesn’t have the same appeal. Maybe if they scratch a few of the bottom-feeders (would anybody miss the Columbus Blue Jackets?) and relocate some teams back to Canada, I’d get more excited.
Tennis
As you read last week, I had a reader write in to suggest that I follow the Wimbledon tournament this year. It turned out to be a great final in both the men’s and women’s bracket, so we’ll see if tennis is making a comeback.
Pros: I don’t know… short skirts? I will grant that it takes a lot of concentration, skill and preparation to compete as a world-class tennis player. The men’s game shows off the power of the sport as well, with serves in excess of 130 miles per hour and impossible winners. And because it’s an individual sport, it’s easier to follow a particular player throughout his or her career.
Cons: Tennis has gone downhill from the exciting sport it used to be even as recently as the 1990s. With improving technology and physical capability, the game has become about power and speed, instead of endurance and precision. Also, there are so many tournaments and championships that the sport seems to lack a true season and off-season. And as exciting as the conclusion is, it’s really tough to watch a four-hour match of two people hitting a ball back and forth over a net, especially when the fans have to sit quietly while it’s happening.
Conclusion: If they updated the scoring system and made some improvements to keep the technology from taking over completely, it could come back. But it’s not completely hopeless.
Motor Sports
You may recall that I already follow NASCAR, and that with something of a passion. But every time I mention this in conversation, someone usually brings up some of the other forms of motor sports out there, such as Motocross or Off-Road Racing.
Pros: Since I already like NASCAR, I’d like to learn more about cars and bikes, mostly because I feel pretty manly talking about gears and carburetors. Racers are a unique breed of athlete, and watching a person wrestle with a 2,000-pound hunk of metal at 200 miles per hour is every bit as thrilling as a perfectly-placed free kick.
Cons: My defense of NASCAR as a sport usually revolves around the fact that we follow sports because we follow the story lines behind them. With some of the lesser-known motor sports, it would be difficult to get to know the drivers and the stories behind them. Plus, it’s not very easy to find these sports on television, and it gets pretty expensive to follow a sport when you have to go to all the live events.
Conclusion: If the fringe motor sports were more prevalent, I’d be more inclined to find out more about them. Of course, all it would take is finding an interest in a new driver or something like that to motivate me to find out more.
Curling
Ha ha… Just kidding.
Golf
I’ve heard lots of arguments that it’s not a sport, but it’s not like it’s bowling or something. Plus, it’s not a bad way to spend the afternoon in Southern California, so we’ll consider it.
Pros: Ask any golfer, from the most experienced pros to the beginners: golf is hard. You can practice ‘til your hands bleed, but you still can’t guarantee what that little white ball is going to do when you whack it with a club. So when the pros somehow manipulate the laws of physics to put the ball where they want it, it’s a little bit exciting. Add the drama of a major tournament and it’s worth watching.
Cons: Because it’s so difficult, golf can be excruciating to watch, especially to those who can identify with the struggles of the game. It’s also a very quiet game, so it’s hard to get too amped up about it. And now that Tiger Woods is out until 2009, it’s going to be a long season.
Conclusion: When Tiger comes back, it will be a fun sport again. In the meantime, we’ll just have to continue wondering what happened to David Duval.
-- -- --
As you can no doubt tell, I have my preferences among the above options. I’m leaning towards hockey, mostly because I used to follow it and miss the thrill of the game.
But I’d love to hear from you as well.
Write me a note at sports@valleycenter.com to convince me to follow one of these sports, or even to enlighten me on a sport I haven’t mentioned.
As always, I’ll be happy to share your suggestions with the community in next week’s issue.
Saturday, July 12, 2008
Why Don't Americans Love Soccer?
When Fernando Torres out-hustled German defender Philip Lahm and flicked the ball over goal keeper Jens Lehmann, it would have been easy to mistake my Valley Center apartment for a villa in the heart of Spain.
I admitted it last week; I’ve become a soccer fan, thanks in large part to the thrilling action in the European Championships. The tournament featured fantastic goals, stellar goal keeping, upsets galore and heroes in abundance.
But after the thrill of watching Spain win their first international championship in 44 years (and the writing thrill of getting to use “Spain” as a plural noun for the last time in a while), a collective yawn seemed to issue from the general public here in the U.S.
Now, don’t get me wrong; there are soccer fans in this country. This is probably more true here in San Diego County than it is in a lot of other places.
But given the magnitude of the championship game, the Hollywood-script-like unfolding of the tournament itself, and even the charisma of stars like Torres, I can’t imagine a better opportunity for casual fans to become hooked on the sport than Euro 2008.
All of this got me thinking about why professional soccer is so popular internationally, but has never really caught on here in the States.
I think it all begins with how different American culture is from that of the rest of the world.
It’s no secret that we in America enjoy, on average, a fairly affluent lifestyle. That plays a part, I’m sure, especially when it comes to the choice between buying hundreds of dollars worth of hockey gear versus some shin guards and socks, but more of what I’m talking about is the traditions and pastimes of our people.
The United States of America, as an independent nation, are only 228 years old, which is still infancy compared with so many other nations, especially those in Europe. History here is tri-cornered hats and muskets; history in Europe is knights and castles, or even gladiators and chariots.
Part of the independence process, as any teenager will tell you, is finding a set of unique interests. Nobody listens to the music their parents listened to, unless you really enjoy not having any friends.
In the case of a nation asserting its independence, a lot of the traditions of the old regime are cast aside as the citizens seek to create a unique culture. It doesn’t happen overnight, but after a while, people stop drinking tea with crumpets and start downing half-caf lattes with their luxury almond croissants. We have to look cool in front of all the other recently liberated countries, after all.
It carries over into the sports world, as we shift from following the games of our forebears to watching the competitions we see as fresh and challenging. Why watch a bunch of sissies in shorts kick a ball around and flail on the ground at the slightest hint of contact when we could have muscle-bound behemoths strap on a set of pads and wallop each other in the mouth over and over again? For the record, I’m referencing the NFL, not American Gladiators. Although there really isn’t much difference anymore, is there?
Americans are notorious around the globe for being, stereotypically, loud, obnoxious, blood-thirsty buffoons, especially when it comes to sports. I hate to admit it, but look at the image differences between our NASCAR with their IndyCar series; as much as he’d like to try, I don’t think that Dale Earnhardt Jr. has quite the same sophistication of Helio Castroneves.
But in reality, we’re just trying to be innovative. Baseball started out as an updated, more challenging version of cricket. Basketball took the intricacies of soccer and added the challenge of using your hands to score a goal. Hockey took goal-based sports to another level, adding ice, skates, sticks and little slabs of vulcanized rubber, as well as giving a nice little boost to the orthodontic field. The NFL… Well, the NFL just figured that rugby needed a little less chaos. Or, at least, some time between plays to figure out how best to maim the other team’s star player.
And so as the new, challenging sports become more and more popular, the younger generations gravitate towards athletes that personify the attributes they themselves wish they had. No longer are skills like endurance, patience, grace and quick feet in such high demand; today’s American athletes are praised for toughness, improvisation, and the ability to silence the critics at every opportunity.
In short, we like athletes who stick it to the competition, even if we catch ourselves and say that winning isn’t everything and there’s no “I” in team. I admit it; I enjoyed watching Eli Manning beat the Patriots in the Super Bowl, even though the Giants had no business winning that game. The Patriots are old school, the old regime, and they got taken down by some hot shot quarterback with a chip on his shoulder. Who doesn’t love that?
One of the negative aspects of this sports independence is that the players seem to have a hard time generating national pride within their respective sports. Soccer players in Europe, and even in South America and other parts of the world, play for their club teams as a job. But when international competition comes around, the players seem to get a little more fire in their bellies. They realize that they’re not just playing for a coach, or for a logo; they’re playing for their country. Michael Ballack may play for Chelsea during the season, but European soccer fans know that he plays for Germany when the important trophies are on the line.
By contrast, it’s hard to find that level of national pride here. Look at the difficulties in selecting a U.S. Olympic men’s basketball team; it always seems like a series of minor injuries keep some of the big names from competing. A European soccer player would probably get attacked by a crazed hooligan if he missed the World Cup because of a strained calf, but if Tracy McGrady’s back is a little stiff, he’d rather not risk any further injury in the off-season.
Because of this national apathy, sports that have a more international appeal tend to go all but unnoticed here in the States. And because they don’t get as much coverage on ESPN (much less the endless debates on Sportscenter, Pardon The Interruption, Around The Horn, Mike & Mike In The Morning, or any of the other innumerable sports talk shows), fans don’t have the ready access to the ins and outs of the game.
For example, if a casual sports fan in America decides that he or she wants to follow the NFL more closely, there are a number of outlets available to learn the intricacies of the game. Want to know how to look off the safety to find the open receiver? Ron Jaworski breaks down offensive strategy every week on Sportscenter. Want to figure out the best blitz package to run against a west-coast offense? Tom Jackson will show you how it’s done on NFL Primetime. Want to find out how Michael Vick is doing in his prison football league? There’s a better-than-average chance that Trey Wingo will have that update on the next episode of NFL Live.
But if a casual fan wants to become a serious soccer fan, it’s a considerably more difficult proposition. I watched at least six international soccer games in the past two weeks, and I can barely explain what necessitates an offside call. I do know that soccer is actually called “football” in Europe, and that the field is actually called the “pitch,” but I don’t know what plays work best on a corner versus what plays work best on a free kick from outside the penalty area. I’m still not even sure why a play for the ball can be called a foul in one instance, then a seemingly identical play can be ignored by the referee. It seems kind of arbitrary.
That’s another thing that is likely keeping Americans from becoming die-hard soccer fans: the weird rules of the game.
For one thing, the clock doesn’t count down to zero from a pre-determined time; it starts at zero and the viewer is expected to know when it’s going to stop, if at all. Then, the clock doesn’t stop when the ball goes out of play, it just keeps going.
At the end of the half (which I managed to figure out is at the 45-minute mark), somebody (I’m still not sure who) decides how much “stoppage time” to add on. It’s usually between one and four minutes, although I don’t know if they’re keeping track or if they just ballpark it. When this stoppage time is over, the referee blows his whistle twice and the players walk off the field. Sometimes he blows the whistle with one minute gone, sometimes with 2:47, sometimes with 3:09. You never really know when it’s coming.
This happens again at the end of the game (the 90-minute mark), and possibly again at the end of both overtime periods (which are apparently 15 minutes each). The crowd doesn’t get to chant “five…four…three…two…one…” or anything like that. They just wait until the ref blows the whistle. It’s kind of anti-climatic.
It also brings up some controversy, as in the Euro 2008 quarterfinal game between Turkey and Croatia. The Croatians had scored late in the second extra period to take a one-goal lead, but Turkish forward Semih Senturk scored with just over a minute gone in stoppage time to tie the game. Croatia’s coach, Slaven Bilic, argued that the game should have been over, since the stoppage time was only to be one minute. According to the clock, one minute had expired before Senturk’s goal went in. But since the game ends on the referee’s whistle, and not on the expiration of time on the clock, the game went to penalty kicks and Turkey advanced to the semifinals.
Americans are generally not in favor of totalitarian rule, especially not in sports, so it’s easy to see how this could be a problem for the average fan. We like the rules to be objective and the outcome to be clear; we don’t like a guy in knee-high socks, shorts, and a shirt with a chest pocket to arbitrarily decide who wins and who goes home.
So given these things, will soccer ever have a true following here in the United States? I think it will.
At some point, the NFL will become the old standard and younger fans will have a hard time relating to it in the same way their parents did. It’s happening with baseball, and it most certainly can happen in football.
But until then, soccer will need to keep proving to American fans that it’s just as exciting and relevant as the “popular” sports that dominate the headlines.
And this year’s European Championship was a great start.
-- -- --
In the meantime, I’m going to miss the excitement of Euro 2008, and I’m looking to keep this soccer buzz going.
If you’re a soccer fan, drop me a line or two about why you love the sport, and I’ll put it in next week’s issue of The Roadrunner.
Write me at sports@valleycenter.com and tell me what makes soccer fun to play, fun to watch, or even just fun to talk about, and why you’re a fan.
And while you’re at it, see if you can explain that whole offside thing to me again.
I’m still not sure exactly how that works.
I admitted it last week; I’ve become a soccer fan, thanks in large part to the thrilling action in the European Championships. The tournament featured fantastic goals, stellar goal keeping, upsets galore and heroes in abundance.
But after the thrill of watching Spain win their first international championship in 44 years (and the writing thrill of getting to use “Spain” as a plural noun for the last time in a while), a collective yawn seemed to issue from the general public here in the U.S.
Now, don’t get me wrong; there are soccer fans in this country. This is probably more true here in San Diego County than it is in a lot of other places.
But given the magnitude of the championship game, the Hollywood-script-like unfolding of the tournament itself, and even the charisma of stars like Torres, I can’t imagine a better opportunity for casual fans to become hooked on the sport than Euro 2008.
All of this got me thinking about why professional soccer is so popular internationally, but has never really caught on here in the States.
I think it all begins with how different American culture is from that of the rest of the world.
It’s no secret that we in America enjoy, on average, a fairly affluent lifestyle. That plays a part, I’m sure, especially when it comes to the choice between buying hundreds of dollars worth of hockey gear versus some shin guards and socks, but more of what I’m talking about is the traditions and pastimes of our people.
The United States of America, as an independent nation, are only 228 years old, which is still infancy compared with so many other nations, especially those in Europe. History here is tri-cornered hats and muskets; history in Europe is knights and castles, or even gladiators and chariots.
Part of the independence process, as any teenager will tell you, is finding a set of unique interests. Nobody listens to the music their parents listened to, unless you really enjoy not having any friends.
In the case of a nation asserting its independence, a lot of the traditions of the old regime are cast aside as the citizens seek to create a unique culture. It doesn’t happen overnight, but after a while, people stop drinking tea with crumpets and start downing half-caf lattes with their luxury almond croissants. We have to look cool in front of all the other recently liberated countries, after all.
It carries over into the sports world, as we shift from following the games of our forebears to watching the competitions we see as fresh and challenging. Why watch a bunch of sissies in shorts kick a ball around and flail on the ground at the slightest hint of contact when we could have muscle-bound behemoths strap on a set of pads and wallop each other in the mouth over and over again? For the record, I’m referencing the NFL, not American Gladiators. Although there really isn’t much difference anymore, is there?
Americans are notorious around the globe for being, stereotypically, loud, obnoxious, blood-thirsty buffoons, especially when it comes to sports. I hate to admit it, but look at the image differences between our NASCAR with their IndyCar series; as much as he’d like to try, I don’t think that Dale Earnhardt Jr. has quite the same sophistication of Helio Castroneves.
But in reality, we’re just trying to be innovative. Baseball started out as an updated, more challenging version of cricket. Basketball took the intricacies of soccer and added the challenge of using your hands to score a goal. Hockey took goal-based sports to another level, adding ice, skates, sticks and little slabs of vulcanized rubber, as well as giving a nice little boost to the orthodontic field. The NFL… Well, the NFL just figured that rugby needed a little less chaos. Or, at least, some time between plays to figure out how best to maim the other team’s star player.
And so as the new, challenging sports become more and more popular, the younger generations gravitate towards athletes that personify the attributes they themselves wish they had. No longer are skills like endurance, patience, grace and quick feet in such high demand; today’s American athletes are praised for toughness, improvisation, and the ability to silence the critics at every opportunity.
In short, we like athletes who stick it to the competition, even if we catch ourselves and say that winning isn’t everything and there’s no “I” in team. I admit it; I enjoyed watching Eli Manning beat the Patriots in the Super Bowl, even though the Giants had no business winning that game. The Patriots are old school, the old regime, and they got taken down by some hot shot quarterback with a chip on his shoulder. Who doesn’t love that?
One of the negative aspects of this sports independence is that the players seem to have a hard time generating national pride within their respective sports. Soccer players in Europe, and even in South America and other parts of the world, play for their club teams as a job. But when international competition comes around, the players seem to get a little more fire in their bellies. They realize that they’re not just playing for a coach, or for a logo; they’re playing for their country. Michael Ballack may play for Chelsea during the season, but European soccer fans know that he plays for Germany when the important trophies are on the line.
By contrast, it’s hard to find that level of national pride here. Look at the difficulties in selecting a U.S. Olympic men’s basketball team; it always seems like a series of minor injuries keep some of the big names from competing. A European soccer player would probably get attacked by a crazed hooligan if he missed the World Cup because of a strained calf, but if Tracy McGrady’s back is a little stiff, he’d rather not risk any further injury in the off-season.
Because of this national apathy, sports that have a more international appeal tend to go all but unnoticed here in the States. And because they don’t get as much coverage on ESPN (much less the endless debates on Sportscenter, Pardon The Interruption, Around The Horn, Mike & Mike In The Morning, or any of the other innumerable sports talk shows), fans don’t have the ready access to the ins and outs of the game.
For example, if a casual sports fan in America decides that he or she wants to follow the NFL more closely, there are a number of outlets available to learn the intricacies of the game. Want to know how to look off the safety to find the open receiver? Ron Jaworski breaks down offensive strategy every week on Sportscenter. Want to figure out the best blitz package to run against a west-coast offense? Tom Jackson will show you how it’s done on NFL Primetime. Want to find out how Michael Vick is doing in his prison football league? There’s a better-than-average chance that Trey Wingo will have that update on the next episode of NFL Live.
But if a casual fan wants to become a serious soccer fan, it’s a considerably more difficult proposition. I watched at least six international soccer games in the past two weeks, and I can barely explain what necessitates an offside call. I do know that soccer is actually called “football” in Europe, and that the field is actually called the “pitch,” but I don’t know what plays work best on a corner versus what plays work best on a free kick from outside the penalty area. I’m still not even sure why a play for the ball can be called a foul in one instance, then a seemingly identical play can be ignored by the referee. It seems kind of arbitrary.
That’s another thing that is likely keeping Americans from becoming die-hard soccer fans: the weird rules of the game.
For one thing, the clock doesn’t count down to zero from a pre-determined time; it starts at zero and the viewer is expected to know when it’s going to stop, if at all. Then, the clock doesn’t stop when the ball goes out of play, it just keeps going.
At the end of the half (which I managed to figure out is at the 45-minute mark), somebody (I’m still not sure who) decides how much “stoppage time” to add on. It’s usually between one and four minutes, although I don’t know if they’re keeping track or if they just ballpark it. When this stoppage time is over, the referee blows his whistle twice and the players walk off the field. Sometimes he blows the whistle with one minute gone, sometimes with 2:47, sometimes with 3:09. You never really know when it’s coming.
This happens again at the end of the game (the 90-minute mark), and possibly again at the end of both overtime periods (which are apparently 15 minutes each). The crowd doesn’t get to chant “five…four…three…two…one…” or anything like that. They just wait until the ref blows the whistle. It’s kind of anti-climatic.
It also brings up some controversy, as in the Euro 2008 quarterfinal game between Turkey and Croatia. The Croatians had scored late in the second extra period to take a one-goal lead, but Turkish forward Semih Senturk scored with just over a minute gone in stoppage time to tie the game. Croatia’s coach, Slaven Bilic, argued that the game should have been over, since the stoppage time was only to be one minute. According to the clock, one minute had expired before Senturk’s goal went in. But since the game ends on the referee’s whistle, and not on the expiration of time on the clock, the game went to penalty kicks and Turkey advanced to the semifinals.
Americans are generally not in favor of totalitarian rule, especially not in sports, so it’s easy to see how this could be a problem for the average fan. We like the rules to be objective and the outcome to be clear; we don’t like a guy in knee-high socks, shorts, and a shirt with a chest pocket to arbitrarily decide who wins and who goes home.
So given these things, will soccer ever have a true following here in the United States? I think it will.
At some point, the NFL will become the old standard and younger fans will have a hard time relating to it in the same way their parents did. It’s happening with baseball, and it most certainly can happen in football.
But until then, soccer will need to keep proving to American fans that it’s just as exciting and relevant as the “popular” sports that dominate the headlines.
And this year’s European Championship was a great start.
-- -- --
In the meantime, I’m going to miss the excitement of Euro 2008, and I’m looking to keep this soccer buzz going.
If you’re a soccer fan, drop me a line or two about why you love the sport, and I’ll put it in next week’s issue of The Roadrunner.
Write me at sports@valleycenter.com and tell me what makes soccer fun to play, fun to watch, or even just fun to talk about, and why you’re a fan.
And while you’re at it, see if you can explain that whole offside thing to me again.
I’m still not sure exactly how that works.
I Loved Euro 2008
It’s not often that sports are compared to a bloody invasion in the 1600s.
But when they are, you can bet that something big is happening. And when it comes to sports anywhere outside of the United States, you can also bet that it probably involves soccer.
That’s right, I’ve been watching the UEFA European Championship, and it’s been so amazing.
When it began on June 7 with 16 teams, it didn’t look like it was going to be all that great. England didn’t qualify, so we wouldn’t get to see Beckham. Sure, Portugal has the next big thing in Cristiano Ronaldo, but it’s hard to get too excited about a tournament with one quasi-famous face.
Then the tournament started, and despite my intentions of remaining a casual observer, I got hooked.
When Polish-born striker Lukas Podolski scored a beautiful left-footer for Germany against his native team, I wondered how inappropriate it would be to keep thinking about the last time that Germany ran through Poland on its way to world domination.
And when Turkey came from behind to beat Switzerland, I couldn’t believe that Arda Turan was able to find that much open space to score the game-winner. Then when the Dutch dismantled France with a three-goal victory, I silently wondered if I could get away with wearing all orange in any situation in life as well as the Netherlands do.
Things just kept getting better: the Turks came from behind (again!) and beat the Czech Republic; the Italians blanked the French, with a little help from an amazing save by goal keeper Gianluigi Buffon on a penalty kick; and the surprising Russians outran the favored Swedes to advance to the quarterfinals.
Needless to say, by this point in the tournament, I had my DVR set to record anything that even resembled the word “soccer” on the program guide. I may have ended up with a few programs about socks, Socrates, sorcery and futbol de liga Mexicana, but it was totally worth it.
Then, of course, came the quarterfinal round, where it shifted from group play into “win-or-go-home” mode. And if you know anything about how Europeans love soccer, you know how disappointing it is to the players to be eliminated. I was ready for the real deal, and I have not been disappointed so far.
First came the Germany—Portugal match, and despite the best flopping I’ve seen in a while, Cristiano Ronaldo could not get his Portuguese mates into the semis.
By far, though, the best match I’ve seen in any kind of soccer, was the Turkey—Croatia quarterfinal game. Even before the match began, it was drawing comparisons to the last time the Turks invaded what is now Croatia, and that was back in the 1600s.
The Turks had just turned in two come-from-behind wins, which is all but impossible to accomplish at this level of play. They had their starting goal keeper, Volkan Demirel, suspended for two matches after he picked up a red card in the team’s win over the Czech Republic. Backup goalie Rüştü Reçber, a 35-year-old keeper with 117 international games under his belt, was suddenly thrust into the limelight.
And he responded. All game long, the Croatians found ways to break through the Turkish defense, and Rüştü kept finding ways to turn them aside.
The game was scoreless through all 90 minutes of regulation, and the teams headed into the 30 minutes of extra time to decide a winner.
With just under a minute remaining in the extra time, Rüştü made a huge mistake; he left the net in pursuit of a wide pass, and before he could recover, the Croatians had scored. The game continued, but there was virtually no hope of Turkey pulling off yet another comeback, especially not with only two minutes of stoppage time added on.
But sure enough, with time running down, Rüştü took a free kick from his own end and sailed it down to his strikers at the edge of the Croatian penalty area. After an airborne battle for the ball and a crazy bounce, attacker Semih Senturk found the only open lane in the Croatian defense and somehow put the ball in the back of the net as time expired. No Hollywood script could have written anything so unlikely, yet here were the Turks, forcing the game into penalty kicks only a minute after they were doomed to elimination.
With momentum firmly on the Turkish side, the Croatians missed two of their first three kicks, and in fitting fashion, Rüştü made a diving save on the deciding kick to win the game for Turkey.
And after all that, Turkey’s reward is to face a seemingly-unbeatable German squad, while the other semifinal features a Russian team coming off a big win over the Netherlands (despite the retina-scorching orange uniforms) taking on Spain, a team with a reputation for finding a way to blow it in a big game.
I personally can’t wait, mostly because I just enjoy quality competition, and you can’t find any better than this.
There are, of course, a few things that enhance the experience, such as play-by-play announcers Derek Rae and Tommy Smyth, who have such endearing accents that they could be broadcasting a crocheting circle and I’d still be enthralled.
Quick side note: I still can’t decide if I like it or not, but the Brits refer to a team in the plural (as in, “Germany are really playing well today,”) even though we in America refer to a team as a singular entity (as in, “Valley Center is really playing well today.”) Ah, who am I kidding? Everything is so much cooler in a British accent.
I can’t wait to see how it all plays out.
Hopefully things end up a little better than that invasion in the 1600s.
-- -- --
Next week, we’ll discuss more soccer, specifically why it’s so popular in other countries. I have a few theories on that, and I’m excited to share what I’ve learned.
In the meantime, if you have any thoughts about soccer, the Euro 2008 tournament, or anything at all, don’t hesitate to drop me a line at sports@valleycenter.com anytime.
But when they are, you can bet that something big is happening. And when it comes to sports anywhere outside of the United States, you can also bet that it probably involves soccer.
That’s right, I’ve been watching the UEFA European Championship, and it’s been so amazing.
When it began on June 7 with 16 teams, it didn’t look like it was going to be all that great. England didn’t qualify, so we wouldn’t get to see Beckham. Sure, Portugal has the next big thing in Cristiano Ronaldo, but it’s hard to get too excited about a tournament with one quasi-famous face.
Then the tournament started, and despite my intentions of remaining a casual observer, I got hooked.
When Polish-born striker Lukas Podolski scored a beautiful left-footer for Germany against his native team, I wondered how inappropriate it would be to keep thinking about the last time that Germany ran through Poland on its way to world domination.
And when Turkey came from behind to beat Switzerland, I couldn’t believe that Arda Turan was able to find that much open space to score the game-winner. Then when the Dutch dismantled France with a three-goal victory, I silently wondered if I could get away with wearing all orange in any situation in life as well as the Netherlands do.
Things just kept getting better: the Turks came from behind (again!) and beat the Czech Republic; the Italians blanked the French, with a little help from an amazing save by goal keeper Gianluigi Buffon on a penalty kick; and the surprising Russians outran the favored Swedes to advance to the quarterfinals.
Needless to say, by this point in the tournament, I had my DVR set to record anything that even resembled the word “soccer” on the program guide. I may have ended up with a few programs about socks, Socrates, sorcery and futbol de liga Mexicana, but it was totally worth it.
Then, of course, came the quarterfinal round, where it shifted from group play into “win-or-go-home” mode. And if you know anything about how Europeans love soccer, you know how disappointing it is to the players to be eliminated. I was ready for the real deal, and I have not been disappointed so far.
First came the Germany—Portugal match, and despite the best flopping I’ve seen in a while, Cristiano Ronaldo could not get his Portuguese mates into the semis.
By far, though, the best match I’ve seen in any kind of soccer, was the Turkey—Croatia quarterfinal game. Even before the match began, it was drawing comparisons to the last time the Turks invaded what is now Croatia, and that was back in the 1600s.
The Turks had just turned in two come-from-behind wins, which is all but impossible to accomplish at this level of play. They had their starting goal keeper, Volkan Demirel, suspended for two matches after he picked up a red card in the team’s win over the Czech Republic. Backup goalie Rüştü Reçber, a 35-year-old keeper with 117 international games under his belt, was suddenly thrust into the limelight.
And he responded. All game long, the Croatians found ways to break through the Turkish defense, and Rüştü kept finding ways to turn them aside.
The game was scoreless through all 90 minutes of regulation, and the teams headed into the 30 minutes of extra time to decide a winner.
With just under a minute remaining in the extra time, Rüştü made a huge mistake; he left the net in pursuit of a wide pass, and before he could recover, the Croatians had scored. The game continued, but there was virtually no hope of Turkey pulling off yet another comeback, especially not with only two minutes of stoppage time added on.
But sure enough, with time running down, Rüştü took a free kick from his own end and sailed it down to his strikers at the edge of the Croatian penalty area. After an airborne battle for the ball and a crazy bounce, attacker Semih Senturk found the only open lane in the Croatian defense and somehow put the ball in the back of the net as time expired. No Hollywood script could have written anything so unlikely, yet here were the Turks, forcing the game into penalty kicks only a minute after they were doomed to elimination.
With momentum firmly on the Turkish side, the Croatians missed two of their first three kicks, and in fitting fashion, Rüştü made a diving save on the deciding kick to win the game for Turkey.
And after all that, Turkey’s reward is to face a seemingly-unbeatable German squad, while the other semifinal features a Russian team coming off a big win over the Netherlands (despite the retina-scorching orange uniforms) taking on Spain, a team with a reputation for finding a way to blow it in a big game.
I personally can’t wait, mostly because I just enjoy quality competition, and you can’t find any better than this.
There are, of course, a few things that enhance the experience, such as play-by-play announcers Derek Rae and Tommy Smyth, who have such endearing accents that they could be broadcasting a crocheting circle and I’d still be enthralled.
Quick side note: I still can’t decide if I like it or not, but the Brits refer to a team in the plural (as in, “Germany are really playing well today,”) even though we in America refer to a team as a singular entity (as in, “Valley Center is really playing well today.”) Ah, who am I kidding? Everything is so much cooler in a British accent.
I can’t wait to see how it all plays out.
Hopefully things end up a little better than that invasion in the 1600s.
-- -- --
Next week, we’ll discuss more soccer, specifically why it’s so popular in other countries. I have a few theories on that, and I’m excited to share what I’ve learned.
In the meantime, if you have any thoughts about soccer, the Euro 2008 tournament, or anything at all, don’t hesitate to drop me a line at sports@valleycenter.com anytime.
SoCal Sports Fans Are Weird
I love living in Southern California.
It’s probably not much of a surprise, but compared to the east coast, SoCal is pretty much the ideal place to live in America.
With one exception: sports.
In my two-plus years in California, I’ve noticed a few things about how things work here. It rains like six days a year, driving up the grade is apparently the same thing as medieval-style torture, and sports… Well, sports are something of anomaly here.
Here’s what I mean.
Southern California is the ideal place to play sports of all kinds (well, maybe not ice hockey, but there are even ways around that). The weather is perfect almost all year, the prevalence of places to play is very high, and it’s so easy to get what you need for whatever sport tickles your fancy.
So in many ways, sports are doing very well here.
But there is still an interesting cultural phenomenon that seems to prevent sports from becoming as deep-rooted in the lives of Southern Californians as they are in other parts of the country.
Part of this is that cities have been established on the east coast of the U.S. for much longer than they have out here. Sports fans in Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and even Chicago live in a culture of permanence; a culture of deep connection with the history of their city. This is more and more true the further east you go, and even that’s only scratching the surface of the typical sports fan in Europe. But that’s a topic for another time.
Consider that the Chicago Cubs were formed in 1869, or that the New York Yankees were formed in 1899. The Boston Red Sox were formed in 1901. The Toronto Maple Leafs were formed in 1917. The Chicago Bears were formed in 1920. The Boston Celtics began playing in 1946.
Each of these teams, and those around them, has a history that transcends modern fandom. Think of all that’s happened since 1869; fans of the original Cubs would have just returned from the Civil War. Most fans going to see the Yankees play the Red Sox would have ridden horses, and not just for nostalgia’s sake. The first game between the Maple Leafs and the Montreal Canadiens could have featured news reels of the unrest in Europe before the outbreak of The Great War (or, as we now know it, World War I).
The deep roots of history surrounding these teams have been passed down through the generations, to the point where so many fans today have watched games with their grandparents, and heard them tell stories about the greats who paved the way for today’s stars.
Basically, this connection to a team is so interwoven with a person’s identity that the two become inseparable. This is a good thing in the sense that you rarely see an empty seat at Fenway Park or at Wrigley Field. This can, of course, be a bad thing when fans lose grip on reality. But that’s a topic for another time.
Here in Southern California, I have seen evidence that there are sports fans. Many a Charger flag has been flown from the roof of a passing car, and it’s certainly no strange sight to see a handful of Padres hats on the heads of passers-by.
But when I go to Petco Park, I see some other evidence that points to a more “ho-hum” attitude from those who seem to be so passionate about their beloved Padres. Fans trickle in little by little until the fourth or fifth inning (or even later). They spend most of the game chatting, eating, drinking, or berating fans of other teams while the game goes on behind them, unwatched. They only make noise when the scoreboard tells them to, and then only for as long as the scoreboard says.
My personal theory begins with the things we’ve discussed about history and all that, but it really comes down to the life we live here in California.
Honestly, I think we’re not more dedicated as sports fans because we have so many good things here.
The Padres fans wandering into the stadium in the fourth inning probably came from something else that’s equally as enjoyable. I mean, who’s going to show up to a baseball game at 7 p.m. when the sun sets on the beach at 8:45? Along with the great weather, we have so many things to do here, which means that it’s so easy and fun to do more than just sit and watch a game. That’s very different than life on the east coast.
Thankfully, from what I’ve seen thus far, this doesn’t hinder the local sports fans from getting out to the games. In fact, I’d say that the Jaguars fans are a whole lot more involved with the local teams than the Padres fans out there. But then again, most Padres fans aren’t the parents of the players.
Still, I miss the intricate level of involvement that sports has in the life of the average east coast fan.
And I’m seeing signs that there are more and more fans in SoCal who follow sports with more than just the occasional Sportscenter episode.
Hopefully that continues.
-- -- --
If you have anything about sports that you want to share with the other sports fans in the area, drop me a line at sports@valleycenter.com. I always look forward to hearing what fans around here have to say about the sports they love.
It’s probably not much of a surprise, but compared to the east coast, SoCal is pretty much the ideal place to live in America.
With one exception: sports.
In my two-plus years in California, I’ve noticed a few things about how things work here. It rains like six days a year, driving up the grade is apparently the same thing as medieval-style torture, and sports… Well, sports are something of anomaly here.
Here’s what I mean.
Southern California is the ideal place to play sports of all kinds (well, maybe not ice hockey, but there are even ways around that). The weather is perfect almost all year, the prevalence of places to play is very high, and it’s so easy to get what you need for whatever sport tickles your fancy.
So in many ways, sports are doing very well here.
But there is still an interesting cultural phenomenon that seems to prevent sports from becoming as deep-rooted in the lives of Southern Californians as they are in other parts of the country.
Part of this is that cities have been established on the east coast of the U.S. for much longer than they have out here. Sports fans in Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and even Chicago live in a culture of permanence; a culture of deep connection with the history of their city. This is more and more true the further east you go, and even that’s only scratching the surface of the typical sports fan in Europe. But that’s a topic for another time.
Consider that the Chicago Cubs were formed in 1869, or that the New York Yankees were formed in 1899. The Boston Red Sox were formed in 1901. The Toronto Maple Leafs were formed in 1917. The Chicago Bears were formed in 1920. The Boston Celtics began playing in 1946.
Each of these teams, and those around them, has a history that transcends modern fandom. Think of all that’s happened since 1869; fans of the original Cubs would have just returned from the Civil War. Most fans going to see the Yankees play the Red Sox would have ridden horses, and not just for nostalgia’s sake. The first game between the Maple Leafs and the Montreal Canadiens could have featured news reels of the unrest in Europe before the outbreak of The Great War (or, as we now know it, World War I).
The deep roots of history surrounding these teams have been passed down through the generations, to the point where so many fans today have watched games with their grandparents, and heard them tell stories about the greats who paved the way for today’s stars.
Basically, this connection to a team is so interwoven with a person’s identity that the two become inseparable. This is a good thing in the sense that you rarely see an empty seat at Fenway Park or at Wrigley Field. This can, of course, be a bad thing when fans lose grip on reality. But that’s a topic for another time.
Here in Southern California, I have seen evidence that there are sports fans. Many a Charger flag has been flown from the roof of a passing car, and it’s certainly no strange sight to see a handful of Padres hats on the heads of passers-by.
But when I go to Petco Park, I see some other evidence that points to a more “ho-hum” attitude from those who seem to be so passionate about their beloved Padres. Fans trickle in little by little until the fourth or fifth inning (or even later). They spend most of the game chatting, eating, drinking, or berating fans of other teams while the game goes on behind them, unwatched. They only make noise when the scoreboard tells them to, and then only for as long as the scoreboard says.
My personal theory begins with the things we’ve discussed about history and all that, but it really comes down to the life we live here in California.
Honestly, I think we’re not more dedicated as sports fans because we have so many good things here.
The Padres fans wandering into the stadium in the fourth inning probably came from something else that’s equally as enjoyable. I mean, who’s going to show up to a baseball game at 7 p.m. when the sun sets on the beach at 8:45? Along with the great weather, we have so many things to do here, which means that it’s so easy and fun to do more than just sit and watch a game. That’s very different than life on the east coast.
Thankfully, from what I’ve seen thus far, this doesn’t hinder the local sports fans from getting out to the games. In fact, I’d say that the Jaguars fans are a whole lot more involved with the local teams than the Padres fans out there. But then again, most Padres fans aren’t the parents of the players.
Still, I miss the intricate level of involvement that sports has in the life of the average east coast fan.
And I’m seeing signs that there are more and more fans in SoCal who follow sports with more than just the occasional Sportscenter episode.
Hopefully that continues.
-- -- --
If you have anything about sports that you want to share with the other sports fans in the area, drop me a line at sports@valleycenter.com. I always look forward to hearing what fans around here have to say about the sports they love.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)