Mercurial

Slate goes on soccer as embodying the entrepreneurial spirit of America much better than the other established sports in this country; if you are good, you go up in the leagues. Fail, and you will go down, relegated. I do agree, and also consider soccer among the most democratic sports.
It is not coincidental that soccer has world appeal: At the last World Cup, you could see countries that that have a rocky relationship, play it out there, in the field. China, Japan, Korea. Mexico, defeated by the US team. Argentina vs England, remember the Malvinas?
But that is also beside the point. Soccer is much more accessible than other sports: you want to play? get three friends, an empty lot, start kicking a ball. Your neighborhood wants the whole thing? twenty two players, uniforms, a stadium and referees go for significantly less than your typical American football team demands. Make that high school football team. A bunch of kids interested in the game? They meet after school in any flat enough field or park, and play to their heart's content.
There is an intrinsic difficulty when trying to explain soccer to the masses of baseball or basketball fans. Zigaro wants his son to be a player, Nike contract and all; when we Latinos mention that soccer is a much better possibility, since there is less competition right now, he says no - who wants to see 22 guys chasing a ball?
But the game is compelling, and it is played all over the world. It is more democratic, rewarding much more ability and skills than stardom, and it is here.
What do you make of the fact that any basketball game can go 101-80, whereas a good soccer game can easily be 2-1?

via kottke