I get this from a lot of my friends lately: "Sure the game was enjoyable, but a game isn't worth watching unless someone wins." Are some Americans too competative to be satisfied with a league where ties are commonplace?
It seems to be an ingrained feeling here that ties are just simply unacceptable. When you think about it, the only sports here that accept ties, soccer and hockey, are the least American. Personally, I don't have a problem with ties, I just see them as a part of the sport, and attempts to find solutions to break all ties seem to always be too contrived. But it is definitely an issue where you'll get vehement argument for both sides.
Or just too phucking stupid to understand that unless something is won in one match and one match only a tie isn't a problem.
Well, I'm not speaking for all Americans, but I have no problelm with ties. There are plenty of times when a tie feels like a win, and plenty of times when a tie feels like a loss. If you're playing the top team in the league, on the road, and you're missing your star player, and then you get a guy red carded, as a fan you'll be pretty satisfied with a tie.
And by "least American", I mean that they are sports that were not basically invented ( basketball) or adapted (baseball from rounders/cricket, American football from soccer/rugby) here in the US.
I suspect it is just another in the long line of excuses as to why someone wouldn't want to give soccer a try. I've heard--soccer's not a real sport, because they can't use their hands, because it's not physical enough, because it's foreign, because we are no good at it, because of all the ties... Give me a break. Ties can be enjoyable, or they can heart-breaking, just like wins and losses can be. If your team is down and comes back to tie it up, it feels like a victory of sorts. If your team is up and then the other team draws even, then it feels like a loss of sorts. It's not like there isn't any emotion involved in a tie. I can walk out of a stadium lamenting a tie, but then looking forward to the next time the teams meet to settle it. The problem with soccer is that it's very hard for a neutral observer (without much soccer knowledge) to really get into a game. Teams need to develop fanatics for their teams. Fanatics will have the emotional reaction to the ties. Casual fans will not.
I hate ties....but they are a part of the game.....just like I hate the last 30 seconds of a basketball game taking two hours, the intentional walk in baseball, intentional grounding in football...all sports have things we would wish didn't happen...... I do agree though, sometimes a tie is a great result.....sometimes a tie is a waste of 90 (or 100) minutes too...... The game is the game...I accept...some don't.
Sure, some are, but they aren't going to make up the majority of soccer fans here. If the Game sticks to its guns, some of them will come around. But if the Game is bastardized for the benefit of folks who really don't have a clue, we all lose. The masses will buy into anything- it just takes the right marketing. We can help them reevaluate their way of thinking where draws are concerned by educating them along the way about soccer's finer points. Adopting the point system for the MLS title (while keeping the MLS Cup in pure tournament form) would go a long way in training the masses properly. But using the MLS Cup as a substitute for a league championship decided on points only strengthens the misconception that a draw is somehow a negative part of the Game.
Having seen a number of scoreless overtime attempts by MLS teams this year, let me tell all who will listen I'd much rather have a tie than watch two teams, exhausted by having already played 90 minutes, try to make it through another 10. And for the times when those two teams have already stunk up the stadium for a full 90, who wants 10 more minutes of that?
Whenever I hear people complain about how low scoring soccer is or how there are too many ties, I think about that Nov., '97 WC qualifier against Mexico at the Azteca. Mexico had never lost a qualifier there, and we played before 100,000 fanatical Mexicans in the smog and the high altitude. For much of the game, we played a man short. And we almost won when Dooley's shot hit the post. That 0-0 tie was a great game.
Most people who hate ties do so because they don't understand the context of a match. A tie almost always hurts one team and is almost always beneficial for the other. You have to be aware of the overall situation and if someone is trying to get into the sport, they aren't going to be aware of any of that. They're likely to see it as a stalemate, rather than a tie, and those two things are not the same thing. Of course, MLS has done an awful lot to make the season meaningless. Off-hand I'd say with 8 of 10 teams making the play-offs, a tie can be beneficial for both teams in many cases.
We have to stop entertaining nonsequitors like this. In Baseball (except the occasional All-Star game) and Basketball, ties aren't allowed. In Football and Hockey they are very rare, so much so that the US has adopted a statistical system that suggest ties are an embarrasment and includes them almost as an afterthought. W-L-T makes sense if ties are essentially non-games. But if the points really count, and Fifa has determined that a tie is worth 1/3 of a win, MLS should at least adopt the standard that presents them in the right context. By the way, how are the NFL and NHL standings calculated? What is an NFL tie worth? As a casual fan of those leagues, I have NEVER bothered to look at their stat sheets in the papers.
In the NFL, a tie is half a win. They are listed in W-L-T form. At the end of the season, for example, if one team has a record of 10-5-1 and another 10-6-0 the team with the tie goes to the playoffs. You will often hear a team can clinch the division (or whatever) with a win or a tie or if another team looses or ties their game. College football was full of ties until a few years back. When the SEC grew to 12 teams and started the first confrence title game, the current overtime rules (25 yard line shot out) was added for that game only. A few years later someone said, if it's good for the title game, then why not have it for all game. I believe this move hurt "tie allowing" sports in America. If college football, as popular as that is, can have 7 or 8 ties ever weekend, then why not soccer?
I agree with Etienne_72772 on the fact that ties can be more interesting than wins (sometimes). The only way to eradicate ties in soccer would be a scoring system similar to basketball, 1 point for a goal inside the box, 2 points for a goal outside the box. Although the original post did bring up an intersting point. Trying to think of a memorable tie which didnt end in penalties or decided on away goals is really hard, Man U V Arsenal could count but that wernt a classic game, Charlton V Sunderland (playoff final) ended in penalties and other than those 2 im really stuggling to think of a memorable tie. I challenge anyone else to do the same, if you can think of a memorable tie which didnt end in penalties or away goals (which rules out Inter V AC Milan) then put it down, otherwise the americans have a point worth taking in. As for the "soccer not being physical enough" point, anyone who thinks that, watch Alan Shearer play, he injured 3 Man United players in a 6-2 defeat, and the injuries were all made by legal movements. nuff said
The example is correct, but the principle is off. In the NFL, a tie goes down as if the game had never been played. The 10-5-1 team goes on because 10-5 is a better winning percentage than 10-6. If, hypothetically (not that this is very likely ever to happen, but. . .) one team went 10-6 and the other went 9-5-2, the 9-5-2 team goes on, even though they'd be tied if a tie was half a win. Well, "full of ties" is an exaggeration, and 7 or 8 in a week among major college teams would have been a very strange week, but they weren't all that rare, and it wouldn't be surprising to see a team finish with a couple of ties at the end of the year. IIRC, when Georgia Tech and Colorado shared the national title in 1991, Ga Tech had 1 tie and Co. had 2 (and a fifth down win, and an undeserved win against Notre Dame in the Bowl game, but then I'm biased).
This used to be true, but it was changed quite a while back. I think the change was made even before they adopted regular season overtime in the mid-70's. Now the NFL ranks teams based on win percentage. The formula is (wins + (.5 * ties)) / games. It is perfectly equivalent to a 2-1-0 point system. If one team is 9-5-2 and the other is 10-6-0, they are considered tied in the standings.
What is the problem with people who can't stand ties in sports??? You can't stand them, then next time don't wear one at a game!! Sheesh!!
Yes, and we get these endless games that go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on forever. Same thing with the NHL. Draws are a good thing. People who use that as an excuse aren't really interested in soccer anyways....
When you break up with a girl, the stated reason is rarely the real reason for breaking up. When you tell her "We're not looking for the same thing out of this relationship", it means she gained weight. When you tell your parents "It just didn't work out," it means she wasn't putting out. Same way when non-soccer fans cite ties as a reason for not liking soccer
Ties suck. Bring back the shootout. I can't stand them. Then again, United wouldn't have any points without them. I don't get the "ties aren't bad" camp. When I go to a game, I expect to see a winner and a loser. That's the whole point of a game. Why is that so difficult to understand? If you want ties, go watch the WUSA. Sachin
I guess it's a matter of attitudes rather than right or wrong, but I have to disagree with you. When I watch soccer, I expect the score to be a reflection of how two teams played over 90 minutes. One team could be better than the other, or they could've been evenly matched, thus producing a tie. I don't see the point in manufacturing a result for the sake of getting a result. I like overtime. I'm actually okay with the current system, but because it's 10 more minutes of soccer not because I think every game should have a winner and a loser. Plus, as others have mentioned, ties can have winners and losers as well. For the favored team, a team that desperately needs points, or a team that had been leading all game, a tie can just as crushing as a loss. Likewise, a tie can be just as rewarding as a win.