Drew's House Of Insomnia

I only watch football (soccer for those in North America) about once every 4 years.  In the World Cup.  I figure if I’m going to watch a sport I’m not really into, I might as well see it at the highest level, on the grandest stage.  That way I can get to see the best doing their best.

This  year, unfortunately, I haven’t had as much time to watch matches as I’ve wanted to, but the few times I have seen it, I began comparing and contrasting the differences with ice hockey (beyond the obvious differences in the field-of-play and equipment).  Here are a few random thoughts I’ve had run through my head:

1. Turnovers in mid-field in football are nowhere near as costly as turnovers in the neutral-zone in hockey.  The ability to transition from offense to defense rapidly is very different for each sport.  In hockey, a turnover usually leads to at least a scoring chance (whether weak or strong).  In football, it is more often than not, simply a change in possession.
2. The lack of boards at the edges of the field-of-play certainly have a dramatic effect on the ability to contain opposing players.  In football, the risk of putting the ball out of bounds really constrains what a player can do near the sidelines, while hockey, players can use the boards to their advantage when moving the puck or attacking an opposing player – you can literally give them nowhere to go.
3. Protecting the ball in football seems much more difficult than protecting the puck in hockey.  Despite the abundance of penalties/stoppages in football due to contact, it seems very difficult to set up a pass or shot (unless it is straight-ahead) without having at least a small amount of time/space.  In hockey, the puck-carrier can initiate contact with the opposition and shield the puck with their body while setting up for a pass or shot.  This allows hockey players to make accurate plays while under pressure.
4. The goalies in football are far more versatile than the goalies in hockey.  The ability to make solid passes to offensive players up-field combined with the ability to handle the ball without being subjected to pressure or without stopping play allows a team many more options than in hockey.  In hockey, goalies who can handle the puck well (even at the top levels of the game) are very few and far between.  While a few goalies can make excellent offensive passes, they virtually cannot sit back and wait for a play to develop.
5. Toughness is not really a celebrated in football.  In hockey, it is simply expected.  I’ve spoken with several friends that are serious football fans and the main focus, they say, is on the win, the “experience”, the celebrity gossip, or a certain player’s “look”.  Toughness simply isn’t in the equation.  In hockey, players get injured and are expected to get sewn back up and not miss a shift.   Heck, referees and coaches are expected to do the same.   I think that’s why diving and going down easy is so tolerated in football.  Players are doing it to give their team an advantage and that’s all that counts.  There isn’t really a downside.  In hockey, diving is very frowned upon (even by your own teammates) so it doesn’t really give you an advantage, especially if you take a penalty doing it.
6. With all the penalties and out-of-bounds calls, it seems that the game of football is really broken up.  Substitutions, too, seem to slow the game down.  I just found that the games have very little flow to them.  Granted, in hockey there can be obscene amounts of starts and stops sometimes, but there is usually some semblance of flow.  I almost wonder if, like American-football, that football players are trying to use the clock against their opposition.  I’m not in favour of that, at all, which is a major reason I dislike American-football.

That’s about it for now.  I hope everyone enjoys the rest of the World Cup!