some canadian guys writing about soccer

Last week, in a similarly-titled post, I inexplicably decided to take the piss out of some Ohio-based college kid for saying “no one cares about soccer”, while also alluding to the “real” trouble — those old-media vanguards, entrenched in their soccer-fearing ways and proud of it, despite the undeniable growth of the sport around them.

Well, TGIF, because the end-of-week has gifted me with a crystallized example of said old-school types: I give you “Trying, and failing, to embrace the beautiful game“, by Seattle-based journo Jim Moore. As much as you’re probably ramped up to read me ranting and raving about how “wrong” this fellow is, I won’t. Because this post doesn’t make me angry so much as confused. Either way, it’s worthy of analysis. So in honour of both the oncoming weekend and a much-loved but dearly-departed website, I’m gonna FJM this one:

I admit to being an unenlightened dinosaur. I am trying to embrace the Twitter and Facebook craze because I’m told that social media is the wave of the future, the way to survive and thrive in the new world.

This is a good entry point for any piece, as it tells the audience exactly what to expect. Hell, I use this approach myself all the time — how can readers and listeners get angry at me for misquoting a statistic or analyzing a game poorly when I readily admit that I’m often full of shit? They can’t. In the same way, Jim has sapped all of the pejorative power of the phrase “unenlightened dinosaur”, which is a shame, ’cause it’s a neato phrase.

Over coffee at the Clyde Hill Tully’s, a social-media expert told me that “followers” are the new currency. I even read a book about social media, “Groundswell,” hoping that some of this crap will be of financial benefit as the full-time job search continues.

Stupid kids. What’s with their oversized pants and loud music? Oddly enough, I kinda want to follow this guy on Twitter now, if only to be kept up to date on what coffee shops I should go to in Seattle and what “crap” I should be reading.

But truth be known, I’d like to take a machine gun to all of it and go back to being a cynical curmudgeon at the P-I, though there’s a slight problem with that because the newspaper doesn’t exist anymore.

The journo in me will take an honest moment to lament the passing of the old-school newsroom. From the journos I’ve talked to directly — as well as things I’ve read — the stereotype of the old-school newsroom as a boozed-up shit show is completely accurate. So if I grew up in that environment, but then somehow found myself surrounded by soy lattes and constant unsolicited treatises on the evils of Big Tobacco from snot-nosed 22-year-old copy editors, yeah, I’d be bitter too.

I have to quit being such an oldster and adapt and evolve and move on and, of course, “reinvent” myself or face the dire consequences of being the same unhip, out-of-touch guy I’ve always been.

No Jim, I kinda like you as you are. The world needs more people unashamed about their fealty for the way things used to be. I just hope there’s no fundamental difference in our opinions on a given subject that would cause me to change my outlook.

Which is a point of reference for today’s column. Believe me, I’ve tried. I’ve watched a few games — excuse me, “matches” — on TV. I’ve several times thought about going to Qwest Field to watch the Sounders FC, though I never have, and I’ve got a press pass that allows me to go for free. But I can’t get into soccer.

Well, shit.

Putting “matches” in quotation marks, cute. Reminds us that words like those are just constructs of those homo Europeans. No American sport would use a term like “match”. Well, except tennis. But you’ve got Federer, Nadal… both homo Europeans. Then again, the Williams sisters are American. And there are “games” in tennis too! What to do, what to do?

(Also, who the hell turns down free entry into the Sounders FC press box? Even non-footie-fans should jump on the chance to grill Drew Carey on why they never play “Plinko” anymore.)

Before it started, I knew this whole Sounders FC thing would be a big deal. I told Gary Washburn, the P-I’s former Sonics beat writer, that he should be open to the idea of covering the Sounders. (Instead, Washburn is now the Celtics beat writer for the Boston Globe.)

Lucky Gary. Covering a real sport for a real media outlet, none of this homo European junk. Someone pass the Wild Turkey.

I went to the news conference announcing Sigi Schmid as the new coach and loved him immediately after seeing him tear up at the thought about being near his Seattle-resident brother again. When I asked him if there was a book a casual fan should read, he suggested one about Dutch soccer called “Brilliant Orange.”

I would have recommended Fever Pitch, but okay.

I had already read Chuck Culpepper’s “Bloody Confused,” an account of an American immersing himself in English soccer for a season, and thoroughly enjoyed it. But I didn’t make it past the first 20 pages of “Brilliant Orange.”

Sigi Schmid: Great Manager, Shitty Book Reviewer.

I remember when the original Sounders were a huge deal around here and went to the first sporting event at the Kingdome in 1976, a match against Pele and the New York Cosmos. I took two soccer classes at WSU, partly because I wanted to learn more about the game but mostly for the easy credits. Had a great time learning about some nuances of the sport.

I’ve added the emphasis here. Jim clearly is not one of those “nope, not soccer, not me, never” types — like Bob McCown used to be, until he finally capitulated and gave in to reality. He’s able to appreciate that people could like the game of soccer. His problem is not necessarily with the game itself…

Much more recently, I was told that it would be wise to write about soccer because soccer fans are typically young and worldly and tech-savvy types who read many soccer stories online, and “hits” are what we’re after.

His problem is that the world changes. This is the most irritating part of the hackneyed “no one likes soccer” / “I don’t get soccer” verbiage that’s been trotted out by countless commentators on both sides of the border. I can accept that not everyone likes to watch soccer. There are sports I don’t like to watch. I don’t begrudge those who do like the sport their ability to enjoy it, however; I just shrug my shoulders and say “meh, not for me”. And if that’s what the anti-soccer brigade did, that’d be perfectly fine.

But it’s the unavoidable tendency to just use soccer as the public face of whatever else the writer fears — change, foreigners, not understanding things, etc. — that is most bothersome. It’s a handy writing crutch (as it’s much more socially acceptable for a bigoted writer to claim they hate soccer because it could potentially incite violence amongst supporters, rather than just saying “I don’t like Mexicans”), but it’s just that: a crutch. And frankly, as a writer and a lover of the beautiful game, it annoys the hell out of me.

Yet I’ve written only one Sounders column on Freddie Ljungberg. I just don’t have the passion for the game, nor an understanding of why it’s so damn popular, and if I wrote about it, you’d see a soccer dunce exposed.

Really, Jim? This is your argument? That you don’t write about the subject because you don’t know what you’re talking about? You’ve been in the business for, presumably, decades. You should know as well as anyone that “knowing what one is talking about” is by no means a prerequisite for covering a subject. I’m sure that there are plenty of journos poring over reams of pages of arcane city bylaws who don’t have a passion for it, but that’s a journo’s job, ain’t it? To educate themselves about a subject to the point where they can pass said knowledge onto the audience? Ah, I’m just a blogger, what the hell do I know.

It’s politically wrong to criticize soccer because I sit here knowing that, worldwide anyway, the Go 2 Guy’s in the minority on this one. Apparently I’m an ugly American who wants more scoring and fewer ties — excuse me, “draws.”

Other Americans — not fringe whackos, but public figures — openly postulate that your president is a secret Kenyan, a secret Muslim, a secret communist bent on destroying freedom through insidious, nefarious plots. I don’t think riffing on kicky-ball is going to ruffle any feathers. Though you may be sanctioned by the UN if you keep putting soccer — sorry, I mean “football” — terminology in quotation marks.

If I’m a Sounders FC fan, I’d make the valid point that in comparison, Cougar football is gawd-awful to watch and use as an example last Saturday’s game against Notre Dame. I’d argue that at least there was a winner and a loser and a hell of a lot more scoring — by one team anyway.

Fast kicking! Low scoring! And ties — you bet!

The Sounders averaged 1.2 goals a game this year, which is high-octane next to the New York Red Bulls, who averaged 0.9.

See, now, Jim, you’re being disingenuous somewhere here. Either your earlier statement about having “a great time learning about some nuances of the sport” was bullshit, or it was legit and you’re just mocking the low-scoring nature of the sport to pander to your presumably soccer-averse core audience. And if that’s what you’re doing, kudos — you’ve identified your target audience, and you’re doing your best to attract like-minded followers.

Wait, you hate the idea of attracting followers, right. I writes what I writes ’cause that’s what I likes, audience be damned.

I was going to keep my mouth shut about my true feelings and let the 30,000 scarf-wavers have their fun until their favorite team and the Houston Dynamo played to a 0-0 tie last Thursday night at Qwest Field. Ninety minutes of nothing. Or nothing-nothing.

As everyone knows, the number of points scored is the only determinant of a game’s merit. A 145-123 basketball game, in which neither team plays anything vaguely resembling strategic defence and the final 90 seconds take 15 minutes to play because of constant timeouts… that’s truly the pinnacle of athletic competition. Fuck these homo European soccer players and their homo European-wannabe fans.

This, I’m told, was a playoff match, and it kind-of was but sort-of wasn’t. Even if the Sounders had won the match – let’s say 1-0, the second-most likely outcome in these things — they wouldn’t have won the match.

“I’m told”? Yes, this was included for rhetorical effect, but still. It’s one thing to express contempt for a game, but must you be so disdainful of your audience as well? “I couldn’t be bothered to research this piece very well. But I’m the media, you’re the audience. Take what I give you. Pass the Wild Turkey.”

In the first round of the Major League Soccer playoffs, you play two matches, one at home and one on the road, and you take the aggregate score to determine which team advances to the conference finals.

Holy fuck, can you slow down? I was just reading about superstring theory, but this “aggregate” system seems much more complex.

The explanation for this? That’s how they do it around the world, and God forbid if they ever tweaked the rules in this country so that casual fans could comprehend what they’re doing.

Shockingly, I’m guessing Jim wasn’t watching MLS in the late 1990s.

But, really? The “casual fans” can’t comprehend a two-leg aggregate series? I’m perfectly confident that any American person, plucked at random, would almost certainly be fully capable of intellectually understanding the concept of a two-leg aggregate series.

Besides, what happened to your love for the way things used to be? Back when the newsroom was a liquor-fueled den of debauchery, those homo Europeans were playing two-leg aggregate series. Can’t have it both ways.

So the Sounders and Dynamo carry their zip-zip score over to the next match in Houston. If that match ends up in a draw, then they play two 15-minute overtime periods — it’s not sudden death, which is great. If one team scores, the other team can frantically try for the equalizer.

They’re not scoring goals, what the fuck are they doing out there???!?

At the end of all of that, if both teams are tied, they go to a shootout in which each team sends five players out for penalty kicks to determine a winner. This ugly American loves shootouts and thinks they should end all tie games, even in the regular season.

Now I definitely know Jim wasn’t watching MLS in the late 1990s.

Of 450 MLS matches played this season, 138 ended in ties. So nearly one-third of the time, fans left their stadiums thinking, what, that it could have been better but could have been worse? This season the Sounders now have just as many wins as ties with 12 apiece.

This is the most irrational anti-soccer argument of them all. The whole “no one ever scores” thing makes perfect sense to me, since North American sports fans are conditioned from birth to believe that getting runs, touchdowns, baskets and goals are the highlights of any competition, and the shit in between is just filler.

But why the hatred of ties? Who the fuck cares if an individual game doesn’t have a winner? If you love goals, wouldn’t a back-and-forth 4-4 soccer game be great? Maybe there’s also something bred into the North American sports fan that says not only are points the only sign that a game has merit, but having “your” team win is the only way to fully enjoy a game.

Yet, any sports fan can tell you there’s enjoyment to be had in watching a game that doesn’t involve a team that they are emotionally invested in, as long as it’s a “good” game. And if the number of points scored is your measure of determining a game’s “goodness” then, well, that’s fine, but…

Wait, who am I arguing with here? Jim’s not reading, and anyone who is probably already agrees with me.

Deep breath, Squizz. Let’s move on.

It’s ridiculous. Give me a shootout and a winner and a loser in every game. Give me a three-match, first-round series. The winner of the first match should not carry an advantage into the second match — winning the first match is advantage enough.

They should really be able to use their hands, too.

And then do us soccer dunces another favor — don’t have an 11-day break between matches, which is what’s happening in the Sounders-Dynamo series; they play the deciding match on Sunday in Houston.

You hear that, Garber? If I cared about soccer — which I don’t ’cause it’s stupid and dumb — I’d want games, er, “matches” closer together, so that my theoretical excitement — which I don’t have — wouldn’t be dulled by an extended break between sets, er, games. But since I don’t care about soccer — and I don’t — I’m actually kinda glad for the long break, ’cause it’ll give people more time to do better things and realize soccer is for homo Europeans.

I don’t care about the explanation, whether it’s for TV purposes or whatever, it makes no sense.

Lesson of the day, everyone: if something doesn’t immediately make sense to you, there’s no use in seeking out or waiting for an explanation. Your initial sense of reluctance towards learning was correct. Pass the Wild Turkey.

They call it the beautiful game and don’t want to mess with tradition, but for ugly Americans who want to jump in, maybe they should.

And the completely contradictory nature of the column comes full circle. You’ll remember that the opening line was the self-effacing “I admit to being an unenlightened dinosaur.” Jim likes things the way they were. Except the laws of soccer. Those need to change, if more people are going to be able to fully appreciate it. But not newspapers. Don’t change those. Fuck Twitbook and Facer and this kiddie bullshit; if someone wants the news, they should come to the only authorized guardians of the truth.

If this column had gone in the direction it could have gone — I’m an unenlightened dinosaur, but I’m being dragged hesitantly into the future and that includes giving soccer a try — it could have been good, even if the conclusion was “much like these social media, soccer just ain’t for me. Pass the Wild Turkey”.

Instead, it seems Jim’s musing about the future of media was just cheap window dressing for the same old tired, useless anti-soccer nonsense: duh, no one scores, all the games are ties, I don’t get it, boo hoo. And that’s a shame. While we’re all entitled to differences of opinion (there will always be plenty of haters of soccer, as there are haters of train travel and haters of licorice), is there anything left for the soccer-haters to accomplish by continuing to toe this party line?

Probably not. So, sorry Jim. I’m going to update my Facebook status and tweet this post. Maybe it’ll get me a few more followers. And then on Sunday I’ll enjoy what should be a fascinating second leg between the Sounders and Dynamo. Enjoy your golfing trip.

Thanks to Jason Davis at Match Fit USA for bringing this article to my attention.

Update: A nice rebuttal to Moore’s column has appeared on Seattle Weekly’s website, wherein author Mark Fefer kicks Moore’s ass in a much more succinct way than I attempted to.