03 Aug Soccer v. football: in defence of Ann Coulter (!)

In response to this post on soccer’s unexpected-by-the-sports-establishment popularity in North America, and this John Cleese rant, Contrarian reader Merrill Smith thinks we’re missing the point:

Could it be that Ann Coulter has a sense of humour? I would never have thought so, but the piece you linked to read like genuine sarcasm. I think it was funnier than the John Cleese clip. And I find myself on her side of this argument.

I have tried to like soccer. When I went to England long ago, I adopted Man U because Bobby Charlton was the only player I had ever heard of. I almost went to a game between Man U and Spurs, but my great aunt died the appointed day. Generally though, it’s just too boring for me. Endless passing, few scoring attempts and even fewer goals.

As for the name of the game, what few soccer fans seem to realize, is that the word soccer comes to us from England. Back in the 19th century, two games vied for popular supremacy in England and here — rugby football, or rugby and association football, abbreviated as soccer. Over there, soccer prevailed and got exclusive rights to the name football. On this side of the pond, it was rugby football that won out and as it evolved it gradually became simply football. If soccer fans don’t know this, that’s their problem.

While on the subject of trans-Atlantic sports comparisons, we could always talk about cricket, but the American offshoot of that game is such an obvious improvement, there wouldn’t be much point, would there? (There will be a five-day delay so cricket buffs can finish their game before commenting.)