Quick! In order, what are the two most popular team sports on Planet Earth? I’d think that #1 must have a lot going for it other than the lambasts described above for it to be #1. Same with #2.
Before anyone gets on my case, please note that I said soccer is okay, except for a couple of minor details.
I don’t have to do drugs to mess up my head. I went to Catholic school.
Now that I would watch.
“Hay viene Ronaldo. Viene Ronaaaaldo. Viene viene viene…viene viene viene…GOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAALLLLLL!!! GOOOOOAALLLL!!!” Come now, does it get any better? Thanks ReservoirDog for reminding me of the joys of Univision.
Soccer is one of my favorite sports, and there is nothing like watching the World Cup. Before I die, I’d like to attend a WC game in person.
Adam
“Life is hard…but God is good”
I agree with Arg and I disagree with Satan? I think this is one of the signs of the apocalypse…
The dumber people think you are, the more surprised they’re going to be when you kill them.
On the Subject of 0-0 draws, some of the best games I have ever watched were 0-0 draws. You dont have to have a definite winner to have a great game.
I like most sports, I like Basketball, purely for the skill and atleticism displayed, AF and Baseball are ok,
But Soccer is very skillful.
and on the subject of hands, its the same for not being able to kick in Basketball
and if you want Violence, check out Hurling,
its team violence with lightweight, ash hurleys (read slin wooden bats with a metal band around the end)
fast and violent, and no wussy padding!!!
J
“Cast a cold Eye, On Life, On Death, Horseman, ride by”
W.B. Yeats
I think that most football fans would agree that a penalty shoot-out is the worst way to end a match.
Until a few years ago, FA Cup matches were replayed as many times as was necessary to get a result. This happened at each round, not just the final. For example, Arsenal played 11 games to win the trophy in 1979 (three against Sheffield Wednesday in the 3rd round). The main problem was that this buggered up the TV schedules. A secondary problem was that fans were paying to see inconclusive matches so somebody might go to one or two matches but not the one in which the contest is actually decided.
We now have one replay for each match, followed by extra time, followed by penalties. It’s not ideal, but at least it offers a sporting chance for one of the teams to win in open play.
To my mind, it is a travesty that World Cup games are automatically decided by penalties (this was, if you recall, how England were knocked out this time, after holding Argentina to a draw with 10 men), but it’s basically done for the benefit of the TV companies.
And the reason that you do not do any of these things is that these sports have been designed all along with the broadcasters’ needs in mind.
American sport seems to be dominated by the TV companies in a way that British sport is not (yet). Why else the stop-start nature of the games? Why so many periods, so many time-outs, etc? Why else are the games so high-scoring that the possibility of a draw is all but eliminated by the play of chance?
Now I am sure that, when Rupert Murdoch finally gets his way, a football match will be played in nine 10-minute periods, the offside rule will be abolished, the goals made bigger, the pitches smaller and the ball lighter (some of these things already seem to be happening in international matches). At that time, I am sure that test matches will also be dropped in favour of limited overs games.
But until that time, it’s nice to be able to enjoy a sport which is still shaped by some sporting considerations and is not conceived purely for the benefits of the TV companies.
includes soccer, canadian football, rugby and australian rule football
http://www.britannica.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=soccer]soccer - brittannica
now get it right please…
you hate soccer but you like football…something is not right here.
bj0rn - i play what is generally refered to as football, and i darn like it.
sorry about that:
soccer - brittannica
The answer to the tie in soccer is simple, and has been discovered by NCAA: If the game is tied after 90 minutes, play 2, 15-minute halves. If still tied, play 1 10-minute, sudden death overtime period. If no victor has been decided, repeat the 10 minute sudden death period. Repeat sudden death as necessary.
Soccer is a team sport where endurance is part of the game. Let the winner of the game be the team with the most endurance (as opposed to some individuals who can score on penalty shots).
Eissclam.
eissclam-
they do have something like that now (in international tournaments anyway) … its called the Golden Goal rule. If the game is tied after 90 minutes, 2 15 minute periods of extra-time are played. if one of the teams score during these periods, they win. if it is still tied at the end, they go to penalties. This was the case in the 1996 European Championship final, and a Damn Good Final it was too.
J
“Cast a cold Eye, On Life, On Death, Horseman, ride by”
W.B. Yeats
Eissclam,
The answer is simpler than that: in a league or group match, it doesn’t matter if the game is a draw.
In a knock-out match, play 30 minutes of extra time, then go to a replay. Make the extra time sudden death (or “golden goal” if you’re UEFA) if you must.
After extra time (i.e. 2 hours in total) most of the players are seriously tired (bear in mind you’re only allowed three substitutions). The quality of the game would only deteriorate, leading to a scrappy goal when everybody on the pitch was too knackered to care. Where’s the sport in that?
Bullshit. Those sports were invented and had rules set up for the way a tie would end way before television was even around.
Yer pal,
Satan
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Bobby O:
“I have played it since I was seven and still do. So I understand it. You people who hate it don’t. You say it’s boring. Your ignorance is showing. You have clearly never really watched it. Take another look.”
So, if we don’t like soccer, it must be because we don’t understand it? The only possibility is our ignorance? Any and all disagreements must be judged in your favor?
This is the usual soccer-defender’s response–“if you don’t like soccer, it’s because there is something wrong with you.”
In other areas of argument, we would call that delusional, or meglomaniacal, or just silly.
Soccer sucks.
Bucky
P.S. Hey, auto racing is popular, too. It also sucks. Argumentem ad populem is still a fallacy.
Oh, well. We can always make more killbots.
Is it just a happy coincidence then for the broadcasters that American football, baseball and basketball contain scope for so many advert breaks whereas soccer contains scope for just one per match?
Um, yeah. Baseball has been played since at least 1869 on a professional level. Football has been played for well over one hundred years. I think that Naismith (sp?) invented basketball over eighty years ago.
TV was first shown,IIRC, at the 1929 QWorld’s Fair. The Dumont network beagin in America in 1948. So, yeah, the sports came before TV.
Now, maybe the sports also FIT American TV tastes better and so the two had a symbiotic relaitonship. Maybe soccer and cricket and such retain popularity in England in part because of having an emphasis (at least initially) on commerical-free television.
Bucky
Oh, well. We can always make more killbots.
Bucky, I probably shouldn’t have been so arch. What I was getting at was the suggestion that some of the rules of these sports (especially regarding intervals, time-outs and the like) have been altered over the years at the behest of broadcasters.
I had believed that was the case. If it is not, then I was mistaken.
Well, I was being more smart-assed than I needed to be. Football does, in fact, have TV timeouts, just for the sake of more commercials.
Seriously, I wonder if the continuous flow of sports like cricket and soccer aren’t/weren’t better suited to BBC and the sports with lots of breaks (baseball, football, basketball) didn’t meet the needs of American TV.
Boxing used to be big here on TV–one minute breaks perfect for commercials every three minutes. Wrestling has been “modified to fit your screen.”
Sports with continuous action such as hockey, track and field, soccer, etc., have never been very popular here and may never be.
No doubt that TV has an influence on sports.
Bucky
Oh, well. We can always make more killbots.
It occurs to me that the situation could be the reverse of what I suggested: commercial broadcasters only show the sports which contain a lot of breaks, so they’re the only ones which gain popularity.
FWIW, cricket contains enough short, natural breaks (when the bowler changes ends or whatever) to allow the broadcaster to sneak the odd commercial in here and there, but they aren’t regular or predictable or very long.
As I said in my earlier post, I fear that, as commercial broadcasting gains importance here, football, rugby and cricket will become subject to more breaks as well.
Bucky:
My tone is in response to the threads above. I think that to say that something sucks without truly trying to understand it is immature. I believe that “We mock what we do not understand” has some validity.
I posted a response to the OP by explaining why I think soccer is fun to watch.
The way I see this argument is as follows:
Soccer sucks.
Why?
Because it is boring.
Why?
For one, it’s wimpy. The players aren’t real athletes, the players are pansies. For another you can have ties.
Okay, fine. Here is why I think you can say it’s not wimpy. Here is why there are ties.
Soccer sucks.
I don’t think there’s something wrong with you for not liking soccer, I think that to claim that it is not a real sport, or to assert that the players are lesser athletes indicates that the matter has not been fully investigated. I don’t watch auto racing, I don’t find it as fun to watch as soccer, but I would never argue that the drivers aren’t skilled or that the sport sucks. It’s just as valid as any other sport.
I’m sorry if my tone offended you. I would never say that the only possibility is your ignorance. The fact that you “hate” a sport might show that there is something out of balance.
I don’t mind that some people in the US don’t ejoying watching soccer, but to say it sucks and give no valid reasons for saying it shows a lack of tolerance and respect.
At least you are in the minority, so my soccer watching days will never end.