The American media’s attitude to sports outside of U.S. borders reminds me of the old gag: Q: “What’s the difference between ignorance and indifference? A: “We don’t know and we don’t care.” The latest reminder came in the wake of Michael Jordan’s retirement. That wonderful player deserves the paeans. But American sports pundits who try to put his career in a historical and global context only remind us how parochial our media remain. They called him the “most popular athlete of all time” and the “most important sports figure of this century, along with Babe Ruth and Muhammad Ali.” Glenn Dickey, a veteran San Francisco Chronicle columnist who declared Jordan “the greatest athlete of all time,” mentioned 13 runners-up — all of them American. I’m not insisting that Pele — who was occasionally mentioned — should get any of these mythical awards, although he once inspired the cease fire of a Nigerian civil war. I’m just astounded that, in this so-called age of globalization, our sports media still have such little regard for what the rest of the world considers important. While foreign media do cover American leagues and popularize their outstanding personalities, the U.S. media remain unconscious of sports with rich histories that are immensely popular in large parts of the world. Rugby, cricket and Formula One racing come to mind. American attention to track & field and cycling is restricted to big-event coverage. You’ve got the Olympics and the Tour de France, then they disappear from our papers. And while judging popularity or influence is virtually impossible, television audience statistics prove that soccer stars are watched by more people than any other athletes. The U.S. journalists demonstrate just how out of touch they are with their endless references to the fact that Jordan is recognized throughout the world. That, my friends, is old hat for soccer players.