By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sports Discussion - Why football failed to catch on in certain countries

Generally I am really interested in sports. However in the last years things changed for me a lot. I am watching less because in many team sports not a lot is happening on the field and I feel like I am wasting my time watching a whole game. I rather would play a video game than watch sports. Often I only watch the highlights.

Soccer in particular can be really boring. In average 80 % of the time is not worth watching. Even worse is Baseball. American Football has way to many breaks so that the game drags out forever.

Basketball and Hockey are both less a pain to watch but I can't stand the last minutes of a close Basketball game when there is a lot fouling happening and in Hockey I wished that the puck would be better visible (the use of a glowing color would help a lot).



Around the Network

We'll Soccer/Football (it's called Soccer not only in the USA and Australia by the way, even in japan it is called soccer hence the game PRO evo soccer.)has lots of flaws and inconsistency especially with the lone referee + assistants to players ratio, in every game there will be an instance where a player makes a fool of the referee.



Farsala said:
NightlyPoe said:
It's more surprising that it's as popular as it is in the world in general. When being a spectator, the main draws of a game are the ability to tell a narrative and for excitement to build with a climax. Of the five biggest sports in the United States I'd rank them as follows.

1. American Football: Easily the best narrative of any sport. The game can be sub-divided into three separate categories mini-dramas on almost every play. The need to get 10 yards in 3 plays to continue a drive, the narrative builds as the make-or-break 3rd down approaches. Where the team is on a drive, the closer to scoring the team is, the more exciting the play, and the overall score within the game. And, of course, there are big plays that happen within the narrative that scramble the whole story.

No other sport comes close to this level of narrative brilliance, and that's why it has eclipsed the others.

2. Baseball: Surprised to see this so high? You shouldn't be. Baseball is highly underrated as a spectator sport. Like football, it has a rising narrative and multiple dramas within each pitch. The tone of the game changes based on whether the count is 0-1 or 3-1. Whether someone is on base, how many outs there are. It's more nuanced than football, so it requires a bit more knowledge, which drops it well behind the other sport.

Tied for 3rd: Basketball and Hockey:

Ironically, these are the two fastest-paced games of the five, but they both have huge deficiencies in their design.

Basketball's flaw is that a goal is worth so little. You could watch a player make the most amazing play ever, and it'll still only be worth two points. Roughly 1/50th of what's needed to win a game. You get a lot of them, but there's more of a feeling of watching whose point total can go up faster than a sense of who is really doing better. If a team wins by a typical score of 105-95. What does that make them? 10% better? A few, almost random makes and misses that seemed meaningless when it happened and that score is overturned.

Hockey might well be my favorite, but its flaw is that the scoring feels almost random. It's hard to know when a goal is going to be scored or the goalie is going to make a save. There are a decent number of goals per game, which is good, but outside of powerplays, it's hard to know when to expect them. Spectators are left to cheer when something happens instead of expecting something to happen and occasionally being blindsided by a big play. Instead it's all or nothing.

5. Soccer: Oh boy, this is bad. Take all of hockey's flaws, make the game slower, lower scoring, and toss in the dumbest rule in sports, the soccer offsides rule, which inspires bad defense so that the ref can bail them out (toss the rule out once they get to the top of the box guys), grown men crying on the ground for minutes at a time as a delaying tactic, and a weirdly all or nothing penalty system. 90 minutes and pretty much nothing can happen until it randomly does. Because the goals are spaced so far apart and come so out of the blue, there's really no edge of your seat excitement until just moments before it happens. So you're watching a long, boring game, punctuated by a few moments. It's the worst of all worlds and by far the least exciting sport to watch as a spectator.

Football and Baseball are definitely the best, but the reason they aren't so popular is simple. The chance to pick up and play. Football and Baseball takes a lot of strategy and players, so it is harder to understand for viewers.

In terms of ease it goes like this:

Tied for first: Soccer and Basketball. Can 1v1 and it is still the same or 2v2, 5v5 and etc. for a full game. Just find a field/urban landscape to put 2 goals in.

3rd: Hockey, similar to Soccer and Basketball but requires more equipment.

4th: Football, Requires more people than a 1v1 to actually play football, otherwise you just throwing it back and forth.

5th: Baseball, Similar to Football, but requires more equipment.

THIS , LOL You hit the jackpot 



Well it didn’t catch on in India because every time their teams got a corner, they built a shop on it.



Sony want to make money by selling art, Nintendo want to make money by selling fun, Microsoft want to make money.

jason1637 said:
Farsala said:

Football and Baseball are definitely the best, but the reason they aren't so popular is simple. The chance to pick up and play. Football and Baseball takes a lot of strategy and players, so it is harder to understand for viewers.

In terms of ease it goes like this:

Tied for first: Soccer and Basketball. Can 1v1 and it is still the same or 2v2, 5v5 and etc. for a full game. Just find a field/urban landscape to put 2 goals in.

3rd: Hockey, similar to Soccer and Basketball but requires more equipment.

4th: Football, Requires more people than a 1v1 to actually play football, otherwise you just throwing it back and forth.

5th: Baseball, Similar to Football, but requires more equipment.

I'd say football is easier to pick up than hockey. All you need is the ball, a group of people and then pick two opposite areas as touchdown areas.

Oh hellll yes, and it's not even close. A large number of people don't know how to skate, and of those, a vast majority are like a newborn doe when they try. Hockey is also, easily the most expensive sport to play among those listed. Especially playing the goalie. Then, there's the requirement for a rink and ice to go with it. A bit trickier to find than grass.



- "If you have the heart of a true winner, you can always get more pissed off than some other asshole."

Around the Network

I always hear this "offside rule is stupid" from people from the US. Without offside the game would turn into a million meaningless goals with poachers as forwards and boring long balls to them. Seriously, it's more than the goals, watch the midfield and try to get what happens there.



It's not very popular opinion, but I find football (soccer) very boring - then again, of all the team sports I only find basketball enjoyable to watch.



COKTOE said:
jason1637 said:

I'd say football is easier to pick up than hockey. All you need is the ball, a group of people and then pick two opposite areas as touchdown areas.

Oh hellll yes, and it's not even close. A large number of people don't know how to skate, and of those, a vast majority are like a newborn doe when they try. Hockey is also, easily the most expensive sport to play among those listed. Especially playing the goalie. Then, there's the requirement for a rink and ice to go with it. A bit trickier to find than grass.



NightlyPoe said:
pastro243 said:
I always hear this "offside rule is stupid" from people from the US. Without offside the game would turn into a million meaningless goals with poachers as forwards and boring long balls to them. Seriously, it's more than the goals, watch the midfield and try to get what happens there.

Read the actual comment.  Once again, I said the rule should be dropped when it gets carried to a certain point on the field.  Call it an attacking zone or whatever.  It wouldn't change the midfield game at all really.  It would just stop the defense from getting bailed out next to the goal.

As for telling us to watch the midfield game.  It's really not that hard to follow, nor is it all that interesting.  That sentiment is almost a demonstration of why soccer is such a lousy sport to watch.

The 'Attacking Zone' is the opposition half, you can't be offside if you are in your half when the ball is played to you and then move to the opposition half. If you are in the opposition half and are between the last man and keeper, it's offside. The idea is to stop people from just standing next to the goal all game like idiots, in school we call this goal hanging as there is no offside in playground football.

Last edited by The Fury - on 24 July 2018

Hmm, pie.

It's just America self segregating itself, always was. And American football is embarrassing, bunch of wimps Rugby players laugh at.