Skip to main content

Football vs. Soccer

No, this is not a debate about the merits of The Sport of American Football vs. The Sport of Soccer. This is a debate about whether the sport we know as "soccer" in the U.S. should be called soccer or football, by an enthusiast living here in the U.S.

First, not many people realize this, but the word soccer comes from an abbreviation of the term, Association Football, which was what soccer was first called in England to distinguish it from rugby football, which is apparently also called football by really old people in the U.K. How you get to the word "soccer" from the words "Association Football" is beyond me. But you can see the "soc" there in the word "association." Anyway, it seems that in the U.K. people use football and soccer interchangeably, with a heavy preference for the word football.

So, can and should a U.S. soccer fan refer to soccer as football? Here's my take:

Reasons for it:

1.) If you look at the game itself, it really makes a lot more sense to refer to soccer as "football" than it does to call American Football "football." To me this is an air-tight argument.

2.) The game is called "football" or "futbol" literally everywhere else in the world except the U.S. and Canada. So in an effort to be culturally aware, when you sit down to watch an English Premier League game, you really are correct saying that you are watching "football."

3.) It's also just fun to purposely fly in the face of accepted terminology once in a while. But be wary, you will ruffle some feathers with this. Get into a bar or a heated conversation and start throwing the word "football" around for soccer, and you will get some flak. If enough alcohol is involved, and you're in the wrong place, you may get into a fight.

4.) Related to #2 I suppose, but calling the game "football" is a way to express a connection with the deep heritage and tradition of the game, and with your millions of brothers and sisters around the world who follow it as well.

Reasons against it:

1.) There is something to be said for speaking in your own vernacular. Regardless what they do in the rest of the world, the American word for soccer is soccer, and what we mean when we say football is American Football. If you spent the first 10 - 12 years of your life in America, try as you might, you will never undo this syntactic connection in your brain. It's impossible to fight it and, kind of ridiculous unless you can ever lay claim to having grown up in a foreign country. Plus, if you want to be understood and not have to explain yourself all the time, you just call it soccer.

2.) Unless you're doing it out of spite or stubbornness (perfectly valid reasons) it's a bit of a pretentious affection. Would you walk around calling soccer "calcio" because that's what they call it in Italy? Or would you call a flashlight a "torch" or your running shoes your "trainers" and expect to be taken seriously? No. And neither can any American who calls soccer "football" without a mischievous gleam in his eye.

The Verdict:

Call it whatever you want and own it. Just know that you will suffer the consequences such as a.) people thinking you're pretentious, and b.) having to explain yourself. I've gone through a phase of referring to it as "football" but that quickly disappeared because it confuses non-soccer fans too easily and, I'm American, I live in America, and therefore I speak American English. Once I stopped remembering to call soccer football, I quickly reverted to calling it soccer, and always will.

That said I highly encourage you to pepper the word "football" in there whenever you get the chance, in reference to soccer. It's fun to throw people off and it may even start some interesting conversations or bar fights.


Grace McQueeny said…
After living in Ireland, I got very used to called soccer "football." I don't plan on going back.

HOLIDAY Q. What is something that is "trending" that you're really not into?

Popular posts from this blog

New Yorker Fiction Review: "The Apologizer" by Milan Kundera

Issue: May 4, 2015

Rating: $$

Review: It took me five years and three separate attempts to finish Milan Kundera's famous novel, The Unbearable Lightness of Being, but in spite of that, quotes and insights from that book still rattle round my head on a weekly basis. What I mean to say is: my feelings on Kundera are very similar to my feelings on Haruki Murakami. I enjoy reading his work, but in small doses, like this short story.

Like Murakami, Kundera uses elements of magical realism, but where in a Murakami story you might encounter a flying dolphin or a disappearing hotel or a person who has lived his whole life in the same room, refusing to leave, Kundera's magical realism offers more direct insights and perspective on real life.

In Kundera's worlds, time and space are malleable and everything that ever happened in history is happening at the same time, and the narrator is a completely omniscient, caring, witty, and hands-on god-like being.

And so it is with "The Apo…

New Yorker Fiction Reviews: "Meet the President!" by Zadie Smith

Each week I review the short fiction from a recent issue of The New Yorker. If you told me when I was 12 that I'd be doing this I'd have been like, "Dork. There's no such thing as blogs," and I'd have been right...

Issue: Aug. 12 & 19, 2013

Story: "Meet the President!"

Author:Zadie Smith

(Please note: I've developed a highly sophisticated grading system, which I'll be using from now on.  Each story will now receive a Final Grade of either READ IT or DON'T READ it. See the bottom of the review for this story's grade...after you've read the review, natch.)

Plot: Set in England, far into the future (lets say 2113) a privileged youth of 15, named Bill Peek, encounters a few poor villagers from a small, abandoned coastal town on the southeast shore. He meets a little girl named Aggie, who is going to her sister's funeral. Peek is cut-off from real life by a sophisticated video game system that is implanted in his head, therefore th…

A Piece of Advice I Learned From My Grandfather

My grandfather was one of the most learned men I know. He read widely and voraciously, and not just in the sciences (he was a doctor); he loved politics, philosophy, and great literature as well. Whenever he finished a book he would write his thoughts about the book in the front cover and then sign and date it. To this day every once in a while I will open a book from my bookshelf or my mother's bookshelf, or at one of my family members' homes, and there will be my grandfather's handwriting. He was also a great giver of his books; if you remarked that you liked a particular one or wanted to read it, you were almost sure to take it home with you.

Reading is a very solitary pursuit but my grandfather was not a solitary person. He relished having family and friends around him which is convenient because he was blessed with a lot of both. And he carried out his intellectual life in a very "public" way as well. He was, in some ways, an intellectual evangelist. If he r…