Some group with scientific credentials just announced that soccer was the most exciting sport. They based their decision on one variable: predictability of outcome. They found more upsets in soccer than in other major spectator sports, recent baseball being cited as a possible exception: in the US in the past couple of years there had been more baseball upsets than soccer upsets. World wide and over longer periods, it’s soccer.
In contrast, tennis phenom, Roger Federer, just announced that his game was pretty solid as it is: he doesn’t see much need for improvement, he merely needs to maintain his quality and his hunger for victories.
In sports where I have a favorite, I’ll be excited enough to see my favorite prevail. On the other hand, watching Roger dismiss contender after contender, I have to admit that my attention may flag, I may fail to focus on every point.
Still, if Federer won every match for the next ten years it would be fine with me. (Ditto the Rocket, once upon a time:or Bjorn Borg, or even John Newcombe.) And I’m not the only fan who’d still be cheering if Michael Jordan was poised to win a tenth or twelfth or fifteenth straight NBA crown.
My beloved Martina Hingis just returned to competition. My beloved Justine Hennin just beat her 6-3, 6-3. I’d hurt, and cheer, either way.
Still, on the subject, what fools we are not to watch more soccer.
Part of the problem is TV. There are some sports that don’t televise well: skiing, swimming, horse racing ... people racing ... and soccer.
Those TV execs, and TV device designers, should be working on ways to put the audience better inside the game.
No comments:
Post a Comment