Here's why there's an offsides rule in soccer. Without it, strikers would simply lounge in the area near the opponent's goal, as would defenders, and we'd see games that amount to little more than a defender getting the ball and booting it down the field to create what basically amounts to variations of 1 v. 1 scoring opportunities. There would be very little teamwork or flow to the game, and far less action in the middle of the field. The game would be very sterile and devoid of real movement.
The offsides rule adds sophistication and creativity to the game. Yes, it makes it more difficult to score, but goalkeepers and defenders are forced to work on their coordination, as are midfielders, wingers, and strikers. It makes the game more dynamic in the sense that it adds complexity to the game, forcing teams to carefully coordinate their use of spacing and time, and building your way up the field through passes, as opposed to just booting it up the field and hoping for the best in a 1 v 1 or 2 v 2. The offsides rule puts more value on teamwork, formations, and even specialized positions within the framework of a given formation.
For those who may be interested, here's an excerpt on the history of the rule...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offside_%2...29#History
The Two Most Common Criticisms of the Game
Flopping
Believe me, as a soccer fan, it annoys me also, and it actually does most fans of the sport. What's equally annoying though is that it's allowed to go on. There are rules in place against it, most notably within the keeper's box, but they're almost never enforced. It's like the signs we see in Texas everywhere that slower drivers are to keep to the right, but there are people all over the state who will move over for no one, and will ride for hours in the passing lane, forcing others to pass them on the right. That's because it's rarely enforced here. Soccer is the same with regard to flopping.
Flopping puts a black eye on the sport, and an easy way to deal with it is to actually start carding players for it. If a player recklessly challenges other, they're carded. Well if a player is found guilty of flopping they could be given a yellow card in that game as well. They wouldn't even need to card them for every instance. If they're carded just once per game for what's considered flops, and it happens again in the next game, they'd then have to miss the third game for accumulated yellows. When players know they could miss one of every 3 games if they're deemed by officials to be flopping, I guarantee you they'll stop doing it.
As it stands, players are supposed to be carded for flopping inside the keeper's box anyway, but they rarely are. FIFA's lazy Presidents have, over the years, allowed this crap to go on for too long, and that's why we're in the situation we're in right now.
Low Scoring
I love the game because of the action. Some equate excitement with scoring. Some equate excitement with action. Some need both to be entertained. After all, people are different, right? So there's nothing wrong with that.
To me, when I'm watching my teams play, the anticipation of a buildup offensively and its potential for scoring, or the looming threat of an opponent's buildup offensively and their potential for scoring, is where the excitement is built in. I liken it to the phrase, "It's not the destination, but the journey". A 1-1 game can actually be quite entertaining if there are enough buildups and enough scoring opportunities, but the respective defenses were just good enough in the back third to be able to stop them.
That said, the scoring is generally still low. The top scoring leagues in Europe are averaging just over 3 goals per game (so 2-1 might be a typical score). What I've wanted them to do for years is to make the mouth of the goal bigger. The standard professional goal, as regulated by FIFA, is 2.44 meters (8 feet) high, and 7.32 meters (24 feet) wide. Now, think of all the shots which hit the goal posts at either side, or the crossbar. If the goal were made one foot higher and three feet wider, thereby maintaining the 1:3 ratio between height and width, it would be 9 feet by 27 feet, and we'd see a jump in scoring. Purists would have a problem with that, and that's understandable. But at some point, the game has to change with the times. Balls have changed over the years, and there's no definitive standard for the size of the pitch either, just as there isn't in baseball. So considering that keepers today are taller and more agile than they were 40 or 50 years ago, it's an option I feel no one has considered, that probably should be.