A sad soccer ritual: wise men on high speak of our sport

Also file under: Dude, stop talking. You're embarrassing yourself

Sunday’s Women’s World Cup final has my keys a-jingling.  I think a lot of people feel the same way. The soccer world has been touched by Japan’s gratitude and fortitude, and they respect the Americans never-quit grit.

So, all in all, the Girls of the German Summer (this group deserve a name, right?) have nudged along the soccer season splendidly. The Gold Cup added extra air to our soccer tires in June and the hash-tagged #USWNT is filling up July.

But it’s not just we soccer freaks and geeks who can’t stop yakking about an epic win over Brazil, about a subsequent business-like and professional result over France and now about Sunday’s final.

Alas, there is one downside to all this:  Tag it and file it under: “Wait, I got something to say about this, too!”

It’s as predictable as girly screams at every David Beckham corner kick: every transcendent soccer moment here will be chased by sentiments from wings of the chattering class that don’t ordinarily bless us with their slant on the sport.

And we might even get a fresh round of the truly dreaded and offensive query, “Will this elevate soccer in the United States?” Gawd, it really is all so tiresome and boring, like watching someone else play video games.

Lately, I’ve heard from people who really should know better. These are folks who don’t like soccer and don’t know a thing soccer, and I have no problem with that.  I like Dan Patrick … but I wouldn’t listen to his thoughts on soccer if he paid me 10 bucks to do it.

I mean, does anybody care what someone likes this thinks soccer should be?

Actually, I’ll rephrase: does anybody reading this blog care? I seriously doubt it.

Maybe others feel differently, but I’m long and happily past the point where the heavies of mainstream media can provide validation by parading by our soccer conversations on their way to the Major League Baseball park, probably for their next opportunity to wax nostalgic about “the great game.”

For instance, I didn’t hear it, but I guess Jim Rome offered suggestions about what soccer needs to flourish here.

Sigh. [reaches into bottom desk drawer for stiff drink]

Seriously, Jim effin’ Rome?  This is a guy who inspired a terrific Nike soccer commercial, where the radio bozo goes on about how no one here likes soccer, all splashed with video of people across U.S. cultures playing, watching and loving soccer. And this banana wants to lecture us about soccer, about how removing the salary cap would improve MLS?  No, it would break MLS – just as financial overreach once broke the NASL. (So, yes, the black helicopter crowd would have a field day with this one. Me, I just don’t believe Rome is smart enough to brew such conspiratorial mischief.)

If we had listened to goofballs like this, we would have widened the nets to 36 feet and started awarding seven points for each goal. Isn’t that what the sports writing swells told us about soccer back in the day?

Imagine the inanity of all this. They don’t like soccer. They don’t understand it. They probably fear it. And yet they feel entitled to tell us what’s up and how things should be?  Listen, if anybody is serious about listening to Rome’s impressions on soccer, well, I’ve got a few thoughts I’d love to share on genetic engineering. Now, I don’t know a damn thing about genetic engineering, but why should that stop me?

Locally, I had to listen to a cringe-filled account of Sunday’s win over Brazil by few guys on sports radio – guys that I know personally and like, I have to say. But, man, they butchered this thing like a Sunday hog! They kept talking about the goal call on Abby Wambach’s historic strike, about “The great Ian Drake.” What better way to undermine your own compliment than by screwing up his name (It’s Ian Darke).

Again, it’s not terrible, but listening to soccer talk by guys who don’t know soccer is just tough, especially when they inevitably get around to the old, lame complaints about the unique clock management structure and the gamesmanship. Yes, Brazilian defender Erika is a faking little ninny. But what you’d like at this point is less winking and snickering about the sport, and more nuanced conversation about FIFA and the lawmaking bodies’ confounding inertia on this matter, about how it’s more prevalent in some cultures and less in others and about the need for video review to help tamp down the problems.

Look, I get it. They are speaking to a different audience. But at some point, I just wish they’d get it right or just ignore it and spend (yet another) segment on baseball.

This story by USA Today’s Mike Lopresti is a thumbs up, generally, but he loses all credibility by immediately dragging out the tired old arguments against soccer.

This is the second paragraph:

"Let's say you think any sport where the referee reaches in the pocket and pulls out a little red or yellow card is silly. And you can't understand why they put up extra time at the end of each half, but won't tell anyone exactly how much. And you couldn't describe the offsides rule if they offered you a bank truck. And there's still the same old problem of not enough scoring."

If you don’t understand why the yellow- and red-card system is a pragmatic response to the language barriers of global soccer, if you haven’t invested just a little time to understand an offside rule that is simple on its face, and if you still haven’t noticed that they DO inform audiences of the number of added minutes – then for the love of Grantland Rice, man, stick to crap that you know!

It’s almost like Lopresti is saying, “Look, I’m cool. I hate soccer, just like you. I mean, c’mon, those sissy little cards and all. But this one game was kind of fun, and since we’re all Born In The USA, let me tell you about this one game. Don’t worry, we’ll go back to poking fun at soccer and pushing the little kids out lunch line next week …”

Soccer supporters can at least take solace in this: Such dopey sentiments are mostly now the province of old newspapers fossils who are anchored to dying news rooms, a bunch of 50-somethings just praying newspapers can endure until they can retire without ever being forced to embrace the whole “social media thingy.”

Again, if you don’t know soccer, it’s OK just not to write about it or not talk about it. Believe it or not, soccer supporters really don’t care what you have to say about it.

Finally, we perennially suffer the regurgitated conversations about why soccer isn’t bigger here? In truth, incidences of this particular beat down have fallen steadily, mercifully over the years. Still …

You know, to people who ask this question I always want to ask them: “What about hamsters? I mean, clearly hamsters aren’t as popular as dogs when it comes to pets. Why can’t hamsters be more popular?”

Or, “What about Volkswagens? They’re cool, right? Rockin' commercials!  Why can’t they match Toyotas and Hondas in sales?”

The response, I assume, would be something like, “Who cares?”

A more thoughtful answer is, “Well, the market is the market, Volkswagens have their share and if they keep marketing smart and selling a good product, their share will increase.”

Exact-amundo! So, who cares if “the American public” or “America at large” doesn’t count soccer among its favs?

By the way, I don’t need to say anything further along those lines. The Wall Street Journal’s Jason Gay has said it wonderfully here.