I admit, I've been reading Fred Bowen for several years now (so that I can keep track of what my 10 year old reads in the KidsPost). Even though I also don't agree with his broad suggestions, I have to admit he has gotten much better with this story. First, he flat out admits that he's not a big soccer fan, and why. Second, he hasn't added any moral overtones, which he often does in his articles. He just sticks to "I like more scoring." Third, he defends his position with some decent logic, especially when he used to just defend opinions with "this is good, that is bad" arguments. We may ask or wonder why he writes about soccer anyway. I'm guessing that he has a boss, and the boss reads the Kidspage too. Once a week there is an elementary school class highlighted, and often there are "most popular" questions, often including favorite sport. My off-the-cuff memory would be that 90% of the favorite sport responses (majority of the class) are for soccer. The boss probably says, "the kids like soccer, you better learn something about it, and start writing intellegently, otherwise we will find someone else who will." If this is true, it's a good sign for better soccer writing, even if it will be very slow coming. Actually, less holding and grabbing would be nice, but easier said than done, particularly when it's done off the ball.
I argue with your description of 0-0 draws as mind-numbing. I have seen boring games with any number of goals. If somebody likes lots of goals, that's fine, they should follow indoor soccer. If someone appreciates a solid defense working as a unit to defend their goal (hint, I am like this) then a 0-0 match can be very exciting. My major issue with the larger goals is that I think it's better to find ways to improve the players so they can hit the target, rather than allow poor players a larger target just so crowds can see more goals. (Hence my reference to handing out Super Bowl rings for participation.)
I did say mind-numbing 0-0 games. I know there are 0-0 games that are exciting. I'd posit, however, that the ratio of "exciting" 0-0 games to "why did I spend 90 minutes on that" games is very low. I'm not saying, "change the game, change the game," but I feel that maybe some current rules (e.g., substitutions) and definately the lack of enforcement of other rules can lead to a lot of boring soccer. My main point was, I have no problem with people talking about changes they'd like to see.
Didn't address this in my last post, so here goes. Rules changes happen in response to perceived problems. Banning the zone defense in basketball, instituting a shot clock, etc. were in response to games that had scorelines like 23-20. Now, THOSE were mind-numbing. Phil Ford running the box-and-one. Ugh. FIFA saw an issue w/ time-wasting, so they stopped goalkeepers from picking up the ball on a back pass. Poof, problem solved. That was one of the best recent rule changes I've seen. Another one that hasn't worked as well is the new interpretation of the offside rule. Since this is the only rule in soccer that's confusing, fixing it may take a while. Few people the world around perceive low-scoring games to be such a problem so as to require radical changes like widening the goal. I agree w/ the above poster: the game must change globally. FIFA must decide to try something, and run experiments in sanctioned leagues. For a league to run off and try a gimmick on its own is entirely different and unacceptable. "Put your hands together for the 12th player, the Red Bull SOCCER DOG!!!!!"
I've got a feeling Bowen doesn't know what FIFA is. I'm also quite certain he doesn't understand the consequences of being a renegade league. MLS players wouldn't be at a competetive disadvantage internationally because they wouldn't be allowed to play internationally.
I understand what you're saying. I have to say that I've only seen a couple of matches in my life that I thought were boring. There's always something going on to keep my interest. If my team is involved, I am never bored, and I NEVER wonder why I spent the time. I don't disagree. I'm all for discussions on making the game better, esp. if it has to do w/ better enforcement of extant rules. I do have a knee-jerk reaction against people who don't know the game and come out with gimmicks that they think will solve the problem. One of the biggest attractions of soccer is that it might be the simplest game around. The players go on the field and do their thing without having plays called every 5 seconds, without innumerable breaks. The basic rule is to put the ball in the net. The only complicated rule is offside. The game works, and would work better w/ better enforcement of the rules. I want to keep it this way. Billions of people around the world agree.
Or kick-ins, or blue cards, or free substitutions, or laser shows, or raving PA announcers who never shut up, or players jumping through paper hoops, or soccer dogs, or any other such crap that detracts from the team and the play. They all give me the mulligrubs. (Twice in two days!)
The best thing in Bowen's dopey article is... "Soccer is a great game. Lots of kids love to play..." Uh, yeah. Huge number in the US, and in the DC area, fasting growing youth sport in USA, most popular game in the world. Bowen's conclusion? Let's change it! Wonder how many kids in DC read his Kids Post drivel before they head out for their games?
3, maybe 4. I found it funny that he said the goal size was fine for 9-10 year olds (ignoring the fact that in most leagues, goals are smaller for 9-10 year olds). The part about goals, though... I like chocolate cake, it's my favorite dessert, but I don't eat it every day. If I did eat it every day, not only would I be huge, but I wouldn't appreciate it as much, would I? Plus, I wouldn't get to sample all the other desserts out there. I guess Fred B. just likes chocolate cake...
Soccer for kids offers small goals but lots of scoring, unlimited substitutions, and orange slices at halftime! They don't even call offside until a certain age. As the kids get bigger and better the goals get bigger but the scores go down, the games are longer, subs are fewer, and talent emerges. It's called growing up.
Right, the game show method of determining a score. (although I'd enjoy torching the Metros for 6 trillion points) They could also use the "Family Feud" Method where they "triple the points values" in the final 20 minutes or so.
Make sure they play a good FIFA game where these glorious "rule changes", aka SACRILEGE, are nonexistent.
I'm not going to even get into the soccer aspects of the article. No point in getting myself too worked up. I'll even give him a pass on the basketball comments, BUT the man defends the DH. That would be a death sentence in my regime. Sure the DH lead to more scoring but it also led to the 3+ hour game. Yeah, that's a thrill for the fans. With the National League in town now, I've quite learned to appreciate how NL games are at least 1/2 hour shorter than their AL counterparts. I also liked the bump and run and have always thought the '78 passing rule changes cheapened the NFL game. I don't recall that people thought the old AFL (played in the bump and run days) suffered from a lack of offense. Ugh.
Yup. In fact, the game has been closed to a lot of smaller players at defensive back. I don't believe a cornerback lke Pat Fischer at 5' 7" could survive in the league today with the modern coverage rules. A real shame. It used to be great to see him climb up the tall Philly receivers to knock the ball away.
Each team get 2 timeouts...add in 3 tv timeouts....every 20mins.. Just like last time he "Tried" to write about his inept knowledge of soccer..I just ignore and hope he keeps the cold pack on his tennis elbow.. ~worm~
When did Fred Bowen become overlord of all children? When did he force them all to agree with what he wrote? When did people lose their ability to look at crap and recognize it as crap? Just cause some tool writes something doesn't mean readers will agree.
Primarily an indoor soccer rule. Blue cards signify a 2-minute penalty. Appropriate, I guess, since indoor games are held on grassy ice rinks. They also have three-line violations... I've played the indoor game, and while it's fun, and excellent exercise, it's not soccer. It also lends itself to massive knee and ankle injuries, but that's a separate issue.