September 9, 2003

JONATHAN...JONATHAN...JONATHAN

Minnesota boys' soccer: Is it a dirty game? (Michael Rand, 09/09/2003, Minneapolis Star Tribune)

Everything went pretty smoothly in last Tuesday's boys' soccer match between Armstrong and Wayzata. The play was aggressive but mostly under control. Players occasionally became frustrated, but overall they kept their emotions in check. There was a healthy dialogue between head official Jeff Filipek and the coaches and players from both sides.

Filipek handed out two yellow cards -- cautions for infractions more severe than a normal foul -- but both came in the course of play and were warranted. It was, in short, an example of a well-officiated match between two hard-working, well-behaved squads.

Unfortunately, however, it is not representative of all boys' high school soccer matches. Coaches, match officials and members of the Minnesota State High School League say matches are too often marred by a variety of factors that result in players or coaches receiving red card ejections.

During the 2002 season, 134 red cards were recorded in high school soccer matches in the state -- and others were likely unreported. Boys' soccer players received 107 red cards, while girls received 12. Coaches accounted for the other 15. The 107 red cards are down from 123 and 127 issued to boys' players the previous two seasons -- but between 1995 and 2000, there were never more than 93.


Too violent? The only way you could make the euroweenie game watchable would be to give the players weapons and play to the death, like the last match in Rollerball.


Posted by Orrin Judd at September 9, 2003 4:37 PM
Comments

How about landmines in the playing field?

Posted by: BJW at September 9, 2003 4:54 PM

Tigers, like in Gladiator.

Posted by: oj at September 9, 2003 5:37 PM

As the punch line goes in the joke about the country preacher who inveighed against tobacco chewing, "Now you done stopped preaching and started meddling!" Real football--what most of os call Soccer to distinguish it from Futbol Norteamericano--is the world's game for a very good reason. It is pure atheleticism, not a cobbled-together monstrosity whose rules change from season to season. I would agree that if you don't know the game it is much like watching the Kentucky Derby of submarine racing, but if you do it is exquisite beauty. Probably the best match I ever saw was the France-Paraguay Cup quarter-final in 98. Zero-zero into the second period of overtime, as a long shot team from a tiny country held the eventual world champions at bay with brilliant defense. The beautiful game will never replace the businesses of Baseball, basketball and North American football, but it remains the beautiful game.

Posted by: Lou Gots at September 9, 2003 5:51 PM

And not a one of them can throw over-hand.

Posted by: oj at September 9, 2003 6:28 PM

Worst sports injury to a player I ever saw during my years as a sportswriter was in a soccer game.

Nothing in auto racing, boxing, rugby or football ever came close.

And ice hockey? Pluheeze!

Posted by: Harry Eagar at September 9, 2003 7:23 PM

Yeah, but they have velcro now, so you don't trip over your laces.

Posted by: oj at September 9, 2003 7:47 PM

Actually, it was a match between Marines and collegians. Two halfbacks crossed legs, and one of them opened up his flesh to the bone almost from knee to ankle.

I saw Richard Petty drive backward into the third turn wall at Darlington at 160 mph, and all he did was wrench his shoulder.

Posted by: Harry Eagar at September 9, 2003 10:51 PM

Harry:

He cut himself? Oh the humanities...

Posted by: oj at September 10, 2003 12:38 AM

I lived in England for seven years, and played on the squadron soccer team.

So I know the sport a little.

Made me think that far too many people confuse activity with action.

Posted by: Jeff Guinn at September 10, 2003 7:17 AM

I grew up playing soccer and at least in the sholastic version of the game is a perfect
combination of skill and physical extertion (when the game is allowed to be played). Basketball
is much wussier. In soccer...

a) you get dirty
b) you have to hit a ball coming from 100 feet
in the air with your head (it actually hurts)
c) you are constantly susceptable to slide tackles
that could blow out a knee.
d) And there is just a good amount of pushing in
shoving in the fight for the ball).

Basically the English have traditionally played
the game in a manly manner, but it has not
served them well internationally. The international game rewards excessive caution.

In the inernational game winning means much more than playing a hard game that is entertaining. In
that sense, I think our American attitude really
does respect "how you play the game" (despite
what Vince Lombardy said).

Posted by: J.H. at September 10, 2003 10:46 AM

Ice Hockey is by far the toughest game. No
question about that. As a former soccer player
(and pond hockey hack) I would never pretend
that hockey wasn't toughter. It is pure
organized violence.

Posted by: J.H. at September 10, 2003 10:49 AM

Professional/International futbol is 22 men running in circles for 120 minutes, then deciding the game by seeing which player misses their penalty kick. Even curling is more exciting than that.

And I've never understood the equating of "roughness" with athletic. If that's the case, then the actions in the stands at some soccer games can be far more athletic than the games themselves.

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at September 10, 2003 11:44 AM

My son played soccer when he was in primary school. I took him to a professional game. It was the same as the 6 year old games and unbearably dull. As near as I can work out they only score by mistake.

I guess the reason for the worldwide plauge of soccer riots is that the fans get bored, drunk and start fights to amuse themselves.

My son is in high school now. He runs cross-country. Much more interesting than soccer.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at September 10, 2003 11:37 PM
« REALITY CHALLENGED: | Main | WE'LL ALWAYS HAVE OKLAHOMA: »