In an “Extra Point” for ESPN Radio, Chris McKendry criticizes the allegedly elitist soccer snob and his loony lingo that is plaguing America.

“Fields are packed with kids playing, yet, among adults, soccer becomes an exclusive sport reserved for the few who understand the beautiful game, as though soccer is a fine art.€

“Soccer snobs, I call them.  These fans who say pitch, match, nil and stoppage time.  These fans are the same ones who take their kids to the field for the game.  They say zero and overtime.€

“I understand the rest of the world uses different terminology.  Most call it football, for starters, but I’m an American soccer fan who appreciates the game, understands it and wants it to grow.  Soccer snobs be gone.€

Soccer is not exclusive in the United States.  It is esoteric.  It is not football, basketball or baseball.  Despite a recent promotional campaign by ESPN, information about soccer is actively sought, not passively assimilated.  The myth of exclusivity comes not from alleged soccer snobs lording their elitism over the masses, but from said masses readily admitting and often taking pride in their ignorance.  Should I feign ignorance with something I am passionate about so that others don’t feel bad?  Is that my responsibility?

For starters, most English speakers do not refer to the game as “football.€Â  Though Americans consider themselves exceptional, many settler nations formerly comprising the British Empire have their own derivation of Rugby (Canada, Ireland, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand) they term “football.€Â  Most refer to soccer as “soccer.€Â  The term derives from Association Football, and it is (gasp!) English, so perhaps we should change it.

This semantic point is stupid.  You, Chris McKendry, played tennis.  Is the idea of a tennis “match” so abhorrent?  Should tennis, an actual elitist sport carrying over terminology from 19th Century Britain and, by extension, medieval France conform to be more accessible?  Could the average American understand “periods” better than “sets?”  It’s a far greater leap to suggest “love” means nothing rather than “nil.€

Stoppage time, time to account for when play stops, makes literal sense.  Extra-time works, as does Injury time.  Why is appropriating a term such as “overtime” or “ejection” from another sport the more natural alternative?

People who use “pitch” in one context and “field” in another are not hypocrites, they are functioning in society.  In Britain, I would use “car park” and “motorway.€Â  In America, I would say “parking lot” and “highway.€Â  When I write for this site I use “soccer,”  when I write for a site directed at English fans I use “football.€Â  I am currently in Italy, where I would say “calcio.€Â  It is communicating effectively to the intended audience, not hypocrisy.

In my experience, the only insufferable pedants and terminology Nazis are quasi-illiterate Englishmen posting on blog message boards, not caricatured poncy Americans.

Soccer fans are not snobs.  Accusing someone of snobbery is the refuge of the scared and intellectually stagnant.  Growing soccer in the United States, if that is even desirable, does not require terminology to be facilitated for the feeble-minded.  It requires people to view life broadly, be tolerant and accept new experiences.