No True Scotsman: Pro/Rel Rabbit Hole #1

I've decided to take a break from the USL Alternate Division I thought experiment for a bit in order to dive down one of the most controversial and infuriating paths in American and Canadian soccer; the Promotion and Relegation debate. 

To be frank, there is no "debate", those in favor of implementing promotion and relegation in the context of American soccer have poisoned the well to the point that no meaningful discussion can be had. They've done this to those who might actually agree with them. 

One argument I constantly hear from reasonable soccer talking heads and media types is an argument that goes something like "We all think pro/rel is great and that the US should move in that direction, but we're just not ready yet." While I agree with the latter part of the argument, that the US isn't ready, I also wonder where soccer folks get off saying "We all". All? All soccer fans are in favor of promotion and relegation? 

I'm not. That's right folks! I'm anti-promotion and relegation. I've looked at it, I've seen what it does to leagues in other countries and after considering the evidence, I'm against it. More on that in another post. 

It's unfortunate though that even the most reasonable of soccer pundits sometimes fall into the same logical fallacy that the most ardent pro/rel true believers subscribe to. The "No True Scotsman" fallacy.

If you're not familiar, the "No True Scotsman Fallacy" is a way of reinterpreting evidence in order to prevent the refutation of one’s position. Proposed counter-examples to a theory are dismissed as irrelevant solely because they are counter-examples, but purportedly because they are not what the theory is about. (source)

An example would be: 
Malcolm MacLeod plays golf in blue jeans.
No "true" Scotsman plays golf in blue jeans
Therefore: Malcolm MacLeod is not a Scotsman
Never mind that Malcolm was born in Aberdeen, plays the bagpipes, and is the lead singer of a Gaelic folk band, the fact that he plays golf in blue jeans isn't a counter-argument that all Scotsmen play golf in knickers, rather Malcolm is just wrong.

I've seen this argument hurled at me several times. Never mind that I've been involved in soccer since the late 1980's, that I get up early every weekend to watch Tottenham, that I spend hard-earned money on professional soccer at the MLS and lower levels on an annual basis; if I don't think pro/rel is a good idea then I don't understand soccer.

Therein lies one of the reasons why there is no debate about promotion and relegation. Never mind all the other reasons against it, if you enter the arena convinced that everyone must subscribe to the idea that pro/rel is good and necessary, otherwise you're a heretic that doesn't understand the game.

Unless you can begin to fathom that maybe, just maybe, people have genuine reasons for coming to a different conclusion, there can be no debate.

Now excuse me while I read some Robert Burns, sip whiskey and eat haggis.


Comments