Could have seen this coming.

Not that the United Kingdom would vote to leave the European Union … but that I would last long into the night watching results come in.

Like, 3:45 a.m. late.

Watching the BBC‘s coverage of Britain’s national referendum on whether to stay in the EU or exit it — the so-called Brexit.

Turns out, I don’t need an American election to stay up all night watching returns come in.

I blame this on my sports background.

Sports journalists would, I believe, make fine political reporters. So much of what happens is similar. The buildup. The analysis. Comparing the numbers. What this “team” brings to the competition and what the other “team” has going for it.

And, like a lot of sports fanatics, I enjoy the competition and the striving for victory.

I remember the 1960 U.S. presidential election well, Kennedy over Nixon in a squeaker. I was 7 at the time.

The 1964 election (Johnson-Goldwater) was the first I stayed up late to watch (or was allowed by my parents to do so). Since then, I have watched every presidential election as it unfolds and most midterm elections (Senate and House), too.

Makes perfect sense to a sports journalist.

After all, what is an election but a sport for people wearing suits and ties? With all sorts of numbers/statistics that sports people love.

Whoever gets the most votes (runs, touchdowns, baskets) wins. A zero-sum game. Someone wins; no ties.

How can a person walk away from that when the final result is not known?

So I don’t. I didn’t. In France, I stared at the screen as the results trickled in and, finally, poured in.

Ah, Gibraltar is overwhelmingly in favor of staying in the EU. The northeastern city of Sunderland, however, is not. Ad-nearly-infinitum.

What made it more interesting was that from the moment the Sunderland results came in, seemingly every Briton knew that this was going to be a close vote despite late polls that seemed to see victory for the “stay” campaign. Those results made clear that, yes, the Brexit people could win.

Thus, it became a sort of cliff-hanger, and even harder to abandon.

The BBC’s electoral experts talked about whether this or that previously obscure (to me) locale, like Hartlepool, voted for “exit” by a greater or lesser margin than expected — thus increasing or decreasing the tide of the Brexiteers.

What I found particularly interesting was the role of currency markets.

In the days ahead of the referendum, the currency traders went fairly limp. In part, because the “remain” forces were thought to be leading in the pools, in part because the currency guys were waiting for some tell-tale results to get them to jump.

One pound sterling was valued right around ($1.49) for several days ahead of the referendum. With the idea being that a Brexit would drive down the pound, and a “remain” would keep it at current levels or even push it up.

With that as background, at about 1:30 a.m. two sizable cities in England’s northeast came in with results.

Newcastle-on-Tyne voted “remain” — but by a very narrow margin, which did not track with the final opinion polls. And nearby Sunderland reported a huge majority for “leave” — something on the order of 69-31.

The traders had all the information they needed.

In the next 10 minutes, the value of one pound fell from $1.49 to $1.43.

While BBC’s talking heads were kicking around the notion of Brexit’s success in the two biggest cities of the northeast, the currency traders already saw an upset for Brexit. Or enough of them did to drive down the value of the pound by about 4 percent in a matter of minutes.

As the night went on, this or that city/region (there were 362 election “units”) came in, and we had a running tab of the vote, and analysis from politicians and academics (more polite than in the U.S.), and then we waited for London’s votes to come in — thought to be the last redoubt of “stay/remain” backers.

And at about 3:45 a.m., after I had dozed only once, London votes began showing up, and they were generally “remain” — but not enough so, it seemed increasingly clear, to overcome the “leave” notions of most of the rest of England.

Telling myself that I thought I knew which side was going to win — and that I would never get out of bed before noon otherwise — I allowed myself to retire a bit ahead of 4.

And when I stirred, four hours later, I was back online, examining results and reading everything from just about everyone — at least on the websites of the New York Times and The Guardian.

And, yes, it’s just like sports. Except with a much, much longer buildup to the “game” (and we think the two-week break for the Super Bowl is an eternity), and then a really, really long night of competition, one that takes you into the quiet time of the wee hours, while the Vin Scullys of politics try to explain what happened.

As noted, Brexit won, in an upset, with 52 percent of the vote, and the decision has global ramifications — though perhaps not as significant as they think on the eastern side of the Atlantic.

But, again, I am like a moth to the election flame — hanging around for hour after midnight hour, waiting to see how it turns out.

I suppose I always will.

Next “game”? November 8.