soccer

[gusl]

Whoa... Zidane. What the heck did Materazzi say to him to make him lose his head like that? He probably lost his Best Player award right there, not to mention his image. It's been entertaining to watch Zidane's Wikipedia article as it got vandalized. (btw, is there no automatic way to see who introduced a certain word or sentence on Wikipedia?) (btw2: check out his "roulette" move)

Except for a few moments, the final was ugly to watch, not unlike most of the Cup. While I was rooting for Italy for playing bravely (especially against Germany), I don't think anyone was worthy of winning the Cup... maybe Argentina, but they were out early. Portugal were a joy to watch, but they're just not worthy of the title. Brazil completely deserved their fate.

via MR, two very good links about why soccer is boring:
Is Soccer Boring to Watch?
Why I Believe I Find Watching Ice Hockey and Soccer (and Some Other Sports) Boring

I don't think the game is inherently boring (I love playing it), but I unfortunately have to agree about the current state of the professional game, as defined by FIFA. It has become a very defensive game, which discourages playing forward, and rewards fast running more than fast thinking. If the cartolas were less dogmatic, they would do something about it, but no, "that would be a different game", they say.

The game is also plagued by bad refereeing (penalties, offsides, fouls) and yet FIFA is reluctant to accept new technologies for solving this problem.

Comments

[peamasii.livejournal.com]

Zidane's move was about the most entertaining part of the overtime. Very unprofessional, but funny. More like comics than a serious sports battle.

They should get rid of the goalies, that would make it more interesting and there would be lots of scoring. A strong keeper on each side usually means 0-0 in the 90 minutes these days.

It's not really a boring game, but it has a certain physical aesthetics (some people mention homo-eroticism) which you'd have to appreciate, to enjoy it. Interestingly enough, both of the articles you mentioned only focus on the strategic part of the game (how the team play works, effective play, winning) as opposed to the aesthetics of soccer. In the same vein, appreciating gymnastics does not presume knowing how the points are awarded by judges. Typical American viewpoint, reducing sports to quantifiable events and achievements.

[selfishgene.livejournal.com]

So change the rules such that good aesthetics is closely linked to high scoring instead of being opposed/indifferent. This should be an indirect link, not a 'points for aesthetics' rule. Not an easy task, but it should be doable.

[gustavolacerda.livejournal.com]

For me, keepers can make the game a lot more fun. I think that bigger goals or a smaller field (fewer players?) would make it more fun, though.

My aesthetics have to do with scoring strategy: positioning yourself, etc.

The offside rule could go both ways. If you didn't have it, teams might play even more defensively than now. So I'm not sure that it would promote more goals.

I'd also like to see the clock stopping when the ball is not in play.

The reason teams play so defensively nowadays is because going on offense is risky. One solution would be to make goals scored in counter-attacks only count for half. One could also make goals' values depend on the ball's distance, speed, etc.
Such scoring would make draws less likely.