Moderator: Community Team




































Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
















Army of GOD wrote:Ok...so ONE semi-popular women's sport...



Neoteny wrote:I've never understood the argument of football being slow. It does have breaks, but at least there is planning going on. In a sport like soccer (which is usually being touted as better, and I am a fan of, as well as rugby, and most other sports) it could also be said that it is boring because 90% of the game is spent kicking the ball back and forth down the field. It seems like a silly reason not to like a sport, because there is something else going on, even if you don't know what exactly it is if you're just watching. That's also part of the fun.

































Titanic wrote:Neoteny wrote:I've never understood the argument of football being slow. It does have breaks, but at least there is planning going on. In a sport like soccer (which is usually being touted as better, and I am a fan of, as well as rugby, and most other sports) it could also be said that it is boring because 90% of the game is spent kicking the ball back and forth down the field. It seems like a silly reason not to like a sport, because there is something else going on, even if you don't know what exactly it is if you're just watching. That's also part of the fun.
That "90%" of the game is still being played though. In AF over 50% of the time the game is not even being played. I don't watch sports to see something else going on, I want to watch the actual game.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
















Neoteny wrote:Well, if you don't consider planning your plays and who is going to run them "playing," then you're right. I'll take 50% strategy 50% action over 90% random kicking and 10% action. I don't need the extra "playing." But, of course, there's strategy in soccer as well, but there's not as much variety of action either. You sacrifice the "playing" for the variety of plays.













Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
















Neoteny wrote:Yeah, I understand that. I'm trying to imply that there's more going on in the downtime than sitting around doing nothing. And why should a long thought out strategy be any better than many short thought out strategies?













Neoteny wrote:Titanic wrote:Neoteny wrote:I've never understood the argument of football being slow. It does have breaks, but at least there is planning going on. In a sport like soccer (which is usually being touted as better, and I am a fan of, as well as rugby, and most other sports) it could also be said that it is boring because 90% of the game is spent kicking the ball back and forth down the field. It seems like a silly reason not to like a sport, because there is something else going on, even if you don't know what exactly it is if you're just watching. That's also part of the fun.
That "90%" of the game is still being played though. In AF over 50% of the time the game is not even being played. I don't watch sports to see something else going on, I want to watch the actual game.
Well, if you don't consider planning your plays and who is going to run them "playing," then you're right. I'll take 50% strategy 50% action over 90% random kicking and 10% action. I don't need the extra "playing." But, of course, there's strategy in soccer as well, but there's not as much variety of action either. You sacrifice the "playing" for the variety of plays.








Nobunaga wrote:... I played rugby once, many years ago, and got my arse seriously kicked. I really didn't know what I was doing but it was fun all the same.
... AF has the kind of high velocity impacts that you don't see in other sports, and I think that's one of the main reasons for its popularity in the U.S. Watching a defensive back knock the helmet off a receiver with an end-sprint hit, and the seeing the receiver somehow come down with the ball in his hands... great stuff.
... The throwing game is great to watch. Running is generally boring.
... I personally think soccer, with the addition of some manner of weaponry, would be vastly entertaining.... maybe clubs of some kind.
...













Titanic wrote:Nobunaga wrote:... I played rugby once, many years ago, and got my arse seriously kicked. I really didn't know what I was doing but it was fun all the same.
... AF has the kind of high velocity impacts that you don't see in other sports, and I think that's one of the main reasons for its popularity in the U.S. Watching a defensive back knock the helmet off a receiver with an end-sprint hit, and the seeing the receiver somehow come down with the ball in his hands... great stuff.
... The throwing game is great to watch. Running is generally boring.
... I personally think soccer, with the addition of some manner of weaponry, would be vastly entertaining.... maybe clubs of some kind.
...
I thought it was a fairly decent post until that! At least you made me laugh, that was so unexpected.






















I think the difference is football has specific positions which require different physical attributes. Rugby is not as structured.
That's because no one goes to rugby matches. Get 100,000 people to the next rugby match, and see whether you'd rather hang out in the parking lot a couple hours ahead of time, or fight through the crowds 10 minutes before it starts.
Is football isolated to the town of Football? Players also use their feet in football, but only for specific plays, because it's much more effective to play the way they currently do.
That's too bad. We Americans do it on the sidelines during the football games. It's awesome.
At least you guys produced David Beckham, he's so much less of a dooshbag than Michael Vick.
That's because enough people care about football to put it on TV. Rugby players and team owners don't have to worry about those pesky fans, or endorsements, or advertising.
The world stage? Where is that exactly? How come no one in America knows the name of the reigning Rugby world champions? I bet even you know who won the Super Bowl this year.
And pretty much every state has a team, or two, or dozens, depending on whether you're talking college or NFL. Also, keep in mind, we have individual states that dwarf your little nation in area and population.































72o wrote:Is football isolated to the town of Football? Players also use their feet in football, but only for specific plays, because it's much more effective to play the way they currently do.
[...]
So the "handkerchiefs", enforcement of penalties, and play stoppage do not constitute control of the game? What do the little playing cards in your precious soccer have that the handkerchiefs don't?
[...]
That's too bad. We Americans do it on the sidelines during the football games. It's awesome.At least you guys produced David Beckham, he's so much less of a dooshbag than Michael Vick.
![]()
[...]
The world stage? Where is that exactly? How come no one in America knows the name of the reigning Rugby world champions?



I do know that no America football teams from outside the US are allowed to play in the World Series. You can't argue with that. It's a "World Series", but you won't see any teams from other countries kick a field goal. Nobody cares who wins. Even a quick google search says that the Yankers usually win.
So I checked- now I know that the World Series was won by the Phillies. Evidence here. What? You need a name for your team of hulking touch-down makers? Just call them the Philadelphia Phillies. They could at least bother to research a bit of history and find a decent name.
I think you should learn something about rugby before you go around insulting people. Beckham is pretty good compared to American football: Michael Vick (dog fighting), O J Simpson (murder), Barry Bonds (steroids), Dan Marion (he was in Ace Ventura), etc. And Beckham isn't even a rugby player, so your example is stupid.
At least you could check your facts before posting something. It's just a sign of intellijence.












muy_thaiguy wrote:Barry Bonds is in Baseball. Same with Dan Marion.
Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_F ... ted_States





Frigidus wrote:muy_thaiguy wrote:Barry Bonds is in Baseball. Same with Dan Marion.
Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_F ... ted_States
I think he's blurring the distinction between the two in veiled disdain.







Users browsing this forum: No registered users