Originally Posted by odoreater
They are too slow-paced for Americans?!? Hah! Are you saying that football, and especially baseball are fast paced? In football it takes them 3 hours to play a 1 hour game. And in baseball they spend more time sitting on the bench or standing around in the field than actually playing the game. Say what you'll say about soccer, but don't say that Americans don't like it because it's too slow-paced when two of America's favorite sports are much slower paced.
I would think when people say they don't enjoy soccer because it's "too slow-paced," they actually mean it's "too low scoring." Now, when those same people would rather watch a defensive showdown between two pitchers as opposed to a home run derby, they simply don't understand soccer. Assuming that's not the case, I'll compare soccer to basketball...
Personally, I do enjoy watching soccer. And I wish I had gotten more opportunities to play it when I was younger (but it wasn't really pushed as much as baseball... and I liked/still like basketball much more than either of the others). Anyway, back to what I was saying.
I really like to watch soccer because it requires a complete athlete -- the same as basketball. It doesn't just ask you to have strength (American football) or good hand-eye coordination (baseball). In both basketball and soccer, you need to have incredible stamina, quickness, strength, accuracy, coordination, teamwork, a certain sports IQ, and spontaneity. I won't argue that baseball and football players also need a combination of these characteristics to be successful. Clearly, they do. But basketball, in my opinion, is the only sport that requires all of these from its stars. Soccer would be the next closest.
The complaint I hear most against soccer is how low scoring it is. True, there's always something happening. And it's very action packed. But... only two or three times a game will that action result in something that will directly determine the outcome of the game: a goal. In basketball, nearly every play matters. If someone's moving the ball down the court, you can almost guarantee that you'll see a basket within the next 24 seconds. With soccer, it could be 24 minutes before you see the first goal.
That said, I know that -- in those 24 minutes -- a lot of plays occur that will eventually affect the outcome of the game (yellow card/red card, fatigue, etc). But I'm playing devil's advocate to those who complain about the low scores. They want the instant gratification of seeing a goal (and would probably prefer a highlight reel instead of the entire game). If that's what they prefer, then it's pretty understandable why they wouldn't like soccer. Not that they shouldn't like it. But I can see where they're coming from. Of course, if they just mean "it's too slow" ... yeah, they're clueless.
Baseball and football (US) are much slower than soccer. But I really enjoy watching baseball. I like the strategy behind each decision a pitcher makes when facing specific batters. I love the ability of outfielders to run like the wind and dive facefirst or slam into a wall to save his team from defeat. And I can tolerate the NFL... it's shoved in my face far too much for me to enjoy it. It's also drawn out beyond belief with way too many stops in play. And the whole having everyone on the field switch places with those on the bench (offense to defense) kinda annoys me. Regardless, I can understand why people like it -- just like I can understand the appeal with soccer.
Well, I've rambled enough. But those are my opinions on the aforementioned sports. Play what you like. Watch what you like. And stop complaining about other people liking other sports. Except cricket.