# Am I like the only guy who doesn't like soccer?



## Clouds Weep Snowflakes

What's the all enthusiasm about this? I mean, just 22 people chasing a ball; even Shostakovich used to watch Zenit Saint Petersburg/Leningrad regularly, and some people even said I'm not "a real man" because I don't like soccer; any opinion(s) on this issue from either gender?


----------



## Dorsetmike

I can remember when it was a game, not just another media event with overpaid jerks prancing about, I didn't like it then either.


----------



## amfortas

I have the same issue with soccer as I do with hockey. Sports where possession of the ball/puck is tenuous and constantly changing make me nervous. Combine that with low scoring, and it all seems like an exercise in sustained futility.

I don't think this makes me a bad person. There are plenty of *other* reasons I'm a bad person.


----------



## CnC Bartok

Clouds Weep Snowflakes said:


> What's the all enthusiasm about this? I mean, just 22 people chasing a ball; even Shostakovich used to watch Zenit Saint Petersburg/Leningrad regularly, and some people even said I'm not "a real man" because I don't like soccer; any opinion(s) on this issue from either gender?


Actually, Shostakovich was a big fan of Dinamo Leningrad, although I believe he'd support Zenit if they were up against a Moscow team. :tiphat:

But, in answer to your original question: good God man, WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU??? YOU WILL DO AS YOU ARE TOLD AND LIKE FOOTBALL. YOU WILL CELEBRATE EVERY GOAL YOUR TEAM SCORES, CRY FLOODS OF TEARS (snowflakes in your case??) When your team loses.

Or you can just like and dislike what you choose. Sometimes it ain't easy. I dislike the vast majority of "popular music", makes me a bit of a misfit at times. Doesn't mean I'm going to start pretending.

Then again, if you're in Israel, your chances of seeing decent football are pretty rare. Now you know what it's like to live in Scotland.....:devil::devil:


----------



## Larkenfield

Rugby is a tenacious action sport. Olympic badminton is incredible. Two men and two team volleyball is amazing, the skill and beautiful bodies of women beach volleyball. Table tennis is amazing. Eightball you have amazing shots. But soccer is too low scoring for me though I prefer it over the violence of American football. Even with rugby you don’t have the same kind of violent damaging impact. There’s incredible athleticism in the NBA. Baseball I used to love but now starters are routinely no longer permitted to go nine innings and finish what they start... I loathe that the relievers are called in even when the starter is going well. It’s changed the game and not for the better because such changes are too automatic now. Too much manager interference. Track and field is awesome, especially the discus and hammer throw. Look for the Diamond League meets that can be watched free on YouTube. I’ve seen most of the major marathons in major cities. Incredible to watch and no commercials. Sports are great company and the performances are routinely inspiring. If only soccer was a little more high scoring, though I like highlight reels and some of the players are scoring magicians.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Clouds Weep Snowflakes said:


> What's the all enthusiasm about this? I mean, just 22 people chasing a ball; even Shostakovich used to watch Zenit Saint Petersburg/Leningrad regularly, and some people even said I'm not "a real man" because I don't like soccer; any opinion(s) on this issue from either gender?


I don't like soccer, football, basketball, hockey, etc. The only sport I have any interest in is baseball.


----------



## Bulldog

Fritz Kobus said:


> I don't like soccer, football, basketball, hockey, etc. The only sport I have any interest in is baseball.


I like all of them. American football is my favorite; I remember a fantastic rush I would get from making a hard tackle. It's the best sport to play and watch. Of course, the concussions and related health problems that are severe put a big damper on the whole thing.


----------



## starthrower

Since I haven't met either of you, I couldn't say for sure if your like the only guy who doesn't like soccer.


----------



## Art Rock

Clouds Weep Snowflakes said:


> What's the all enthusiasm about this? I mean, just 22 people chasing a ball...


Well, any sports or hobby can be ridiculed this way.

Like what you like, don't like what you don't like, and don't give a hoot what other people think. The same holds for most things in life (music is another example).

Personally, I like football (as it is called in English, soccer is American), but in smaller doses (I prefer 10 minutes summaries of games).


----------



## Dorsetmike

How many "sports/games" have been ruined by TV, sensationalised and hyped; and players idolised and way overpaid; all to satisfy the advertisers viewing figures.

As I said in my earlier post I remember when it was a game not another media event, with extra breaks for adverts, some games shortened or modified to retain the interest of the couch potatoes between adverts.


----------



## david johnson

many televised sports give me the BIG ZZZZZZZZZ


----------



## elgar's ghost

I still like football, but there are aspects to it which I have issues with:

1. The ball is far too light - it's harder now to hit a ball straight and true than it is to balloon it with ridiculous amounts of swerve.

2. Greedy agents. They make players too easily manipulated and complacent, and, in some cases, as greedy and arrogant as the creatures who represent them.

3. Too little tackling allowed - OK, I don't want midfield to become a total combat zone but these days there's harder tackling in a game of Subbuteo.

4. Evil Empires such as Sky remoulding the game to wring ever-increasing amounts of money from it - I for one preferred the European competitions when they were on a two-leg knockout basis.

5. Too many English clubs are owned by people/businesses who are far from being on the level, or shadowy at best.

6. Diving. A real blemish on the sport and one which is not dealt with anything like as harshly as it should be.

7. Feigning injury. See above.

8. Too many overseas players in the English top divisions. Sorry, but I don't think the game would suffer too much if each team were restricted to six non-British players out of eleven. Plus it would help to root out all the overpaid journeymen who come and go without making a genuine contribution to most of the clubs they sign for and who have little of no concept of loyalty (take a bow, Nicholas Anelka…).

9. Many players are wrenched away from their first clubs at too young an age. A lot of the time they are signed by bigger clubs in order to stop anyone else from signing them, and many end up either bench-warming or being pushed from pillar to post with incompatible loan moves which can completely stuff both their game and confidence before they have had a chance to develop.


----------



## Guest

It is the United Nations of sports. A bunch of people kicking things around, giving the illusion of activity and that something is actually being accomplished, a great deal of theatrics, but ultimately very few goals are met.


----------



## joen_cph

Clouds Weep Snowflakes said:


> What's the all enthusiasm about this? I mean, just 22 people chasing a ball; even Shostakovich used to watch Zenit Saint Petersburg/Leningrad regularly, and some people even said I'm not "a real man" because I don't like soccer; any opinion(s) on this issue from either gender?


It's just like the majority of Europeans not understanding the American enthusiasm for baseball, or US football ...

I particularly liked the Spanish soccer league when it was readily available on common TV channels, in the old days of Romario, Koeman, Laudrup etc. ... seemed more spectacular and exciting back then, IMHO.


----------



## Meyerbeer Smith

No, I don't like / understand sport. I have enough trouble with walls, doors, and the general malice of inanimate objects. Dyspraxia.


----------



## SixFootScowl

One thing I like about baseball is that it is unique among the major sports. 

Most sports have symmetrical field with defense and offence switching teams during play. Baseball has an asymmetrical field and offence and defense only switch at designated intervals. 

Also most sports are continuous action, whereas baseball has a lot relatively inactive times such as when you have a 10-pitch at bat and the main action is with the pitcher, batter and catcher. 

Most sports are timed, whereas baseball could go on for hours and hours. I think I recall a 21 inning game once because of a tie that just would not break. Ha, I guess you could have a game that never ends but I think they will finally call it and pick it up another day.


----------



## Guest

Fritz Kobus said:


> One thing I like about baseball is that it is unique among the major sports.
> 
> Most sports have symmetrical field with defense and offence switching teams during play. Baseball has an asymmetrical field and offence and defense only switch at designated intervals.
> 
> Also most sports are continuous action, whereas baseball has a lot relatively inactive times such as when you have a 10-pitch at bat and the main action is with the pitcher, batter and catcher.
> 
> Most sports are timed, whereas baseball could go on for hours and hours. I think I recall a 21 inning game once because of a tie that just would not break. Ha, I guess you could have a game that never ends but I think they will finally call it and pick it up another day.


If you like those aspects of baseball, them you should try cricket. I understand cricket matches can last days.


----------



## SixFootScowl

DrMike said:


> If you like those aspects of baseball, them you should try cricket. I understand cricket matches can last days.


Related sports!


----------



## Pyotr

I never liked soccer until high definition and I started watching the English Premier league. I like the atmosphere of having full and loud stadiums. Plus the games are on earlier in the day, with there being a 5 hour time difference. My favorite team is Manchester United (MU) although they haven't been doing that well lately. 

I have no problem with athletes getting lots of money. These people are usually from poorer backgrounds. Seeing someone like that get rich is a good thing.

The soccer league in the U.S. is called the MLS. Watching those games is like watching in slow motion, compared to the Premier league. 

Unlike some here, I dont like tackles and rough play. A lot of the World Cup games are too rough and defensive for my tastes. I remember one tactic that I particularly didn't like. In the 2nd half of the game, the leading side would take turns fouling the stars on the opposing team, even though they would get yellow cards. It was obvious they were only doing it to shake up the players. Very unsportsman like.

I'm not saying I dont want to see any contact. There were a couple of MU games where the team didn't get one yellow card, now that's a little too soft, and, some feel, is one of MU's many problems,


----------



## CnC Bartok

DrMike said:


> If you like those aspects of baseball, them you should try cricket. I understand cricket matches can last days.


"Can last days"? A test match is five days, the English county championship has four-day games. The current World Cup is fifty overs per side, these are also known as one-way matches.

I'm old and set in my ways, so consider 20-20 a gimmick.:angel:


----------



## Guest

CnC Bartok said:


> "Can last days"? A test match is five days, the English county championship has four-day games. The current World Cup is fifty overs per side, these are also known as one-way matches.
> 
> I'm old and set in my ways, so consider 20-20 a gimmick.:angel:


You might as well be speaking Greek to me - I didn't understand any of that, beyond the word "days."


----------



## Guest

CnC Bartok said:


> A test match is five days,


However, it's not five days non-stop. They sleep overnight and take lunch and tea! Of course, it only lasts _up to _5 days - the shortest test lasted only 1 day (1932) https://www.quora.com/Was-there-any-test-match-which-was-finished-on-day-1-or-2-with-a-result


----------



## Dan Ante

In NZ the national game is Football, well that is what Kiwis call it its real name is Rugby it is a game that I have tried to get into but I just find it boring, as Dorset Mike says real football (soccer) has been ruined by big money and guys shouting foul etc. at the moment I am watching the women's world series and it is magnificent it is football as it should be a game of skill and sportswomenship. But even with all its faults of professionalism it is still my favorite.


----------



## CnC Bartok

DrMike said:


> You might as well be speaking Greek to me - I didn't understand any of that, beyond the word "days."


C'mon, this is really simple stuff. Here's a clarification of what cricket actually is:

You have two sides, one out in the field and one in. Each man that's in the side that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he's out. When they are all out, the side that's out comes in and the side that's been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out. Sometimes you get men still in and not out.

Still with me?

When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in. There are two men called umpires who stay out all the time and they decide when the men who are in are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have been out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game.


----------



## amfortas

CnC Bartok said:


> C'mon, this is really simple stuff. Here's a clarification of what cricket actually is:
> 
> You have two sides, one out in the field and one in. Each man that's in the side that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he's out. When they are all out, the side that's out comes in and the side that's been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out. Sometimes you get men still in and not out.
> 
> Still with me?
> 
> When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in. There are two men called umpires who stay out all the time and they decide when the men who are in are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have been out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game.


So you keep playing until everyone's been outed?


----------



## CnC Bartok

amfortas said:


> So you keep playing until everyone's been outed?


See? If you can understand, why can't others? :devil:


----------



## Jacck

watching soccer is like watching grass grow, with soccer players in the way


----------



## Guest

amfortas said:


> So you keep playing until everyone's been outed?


Is it a sporting event or a gay pride parade?


----------



## Guest

What Americans think of when we contemplate watching soccer (sorry, not football, we had to take that name from all of you and give it to a respectable, watchable sport):


----------



## CnC Bartok

Jacck said:


> watching soccer is like watching grass grow, with soccer players in the way


If your local big team is Zbrojovka, I can empathize with that comment!


----------



## CnC Bartok

DrMike said:


> Is it a sporting event or a gay pride parade?


Hey! Now the penny's starting to drop!


----------



## Jacck

CnC Bartok said:


> If your local big team is Zbrojovka, I can empathize with that comment!


Slavia, Zbrojovka, Baník, Sparta. They are all the same to me. I learned about Milan Baroš from kids in Tanzania. When I traveled there, the first question you are going to hear is "where are you from, sir?". I told them Czech Republic. And they always said Baroš, Baroš. I said "who?". So I learned about the existence of this guy. I ignore sports, even ice hockey, which is much more popular here. I did not even watch the Olympics finale in Nagano, where we won the gold medal and the nation went crazy. I did not watch it and slept instead. I like doing sports - floorball, cycling, hiking, trekking, judo (I did in the past, but no more), but I never liked watching it. I guess it would change if I started betting. When I lived in Germany, I went to see some football match on a huge stadium in Dortmund. Dortmund Borussia was playing against someone. I was much more fascinated by watching the 50 thousand people go crazy then by the actual game.


----------



## hammeredklavier

No, it's not just about chasing the ball. If your team "just chased the ball" you wouldn't beat teams who played with proper tactics. I think in association football, players have to really think on their feet and make decisions on their own in various situations always thinking about position, space, time. Whereas in American football, coaches tell the players what to do every time, what path to run to. Also I think football is more about actual skills (dribbling, trapping, shooting, passing etc) than brute force compared to American football where having the physique to and strength to knock down your opponent is like the most important aspect.

In basketball, if you're short, you're at a massive disadvantage against tall players. In American football, if you're skinny and small you're at a massive disadvantage against fat and big players. Association football is a more universal sport that values equality among players with different physical conditions in this regard. Small players and big players all have their own advantages and disadvantages. Small players are faster, more able to go through tight spaces. Tall players are able to take possess the ball in air more easily, have advantage in "air-superiority".
Also in association football, you can overcome limitations in skills with practice. In American football, if you're small and can't beat bigger players in body-to-body collisions, you're just useless. 
Outside of US, American football is often thought of as being all about knocking your opponents down like brutes.


----------



## Guest

hammeredklavier said:


> No, it's not just about chasing the ball. If your team "just chased the ball" you wouldn't beat teams who played with proper tactics. I think in association football, players have to really think on their feet and make decisions on their own in various situations always thinking about position, space, time. Whereas in American football, coaches tell the players what to do every time, what path to run to. Also I think football is more about actual skills (dribbling, trapping, shooting, passing etc) than brute force compared to American football where having the physique to and strength to knock down your opponent is like the most important aspect.
> 
> In basketball, if you're short, you're at a massive disadvantage against tall players. In American football, if you're skinny and small you're at a massive disadvantage against fat and big players. Association football is a more universal sport that values equality among players with different physical conditions in this regard. Small players and big players all have their own advantages and disadvantages. Small players are faster, more able to go through tight spaces. Tall players are able to take possess the ball in air more easily, have advantage in "air-superiority".
> Also in association football, you can overcome limitations in skills with practice. In American football, if you're small and can't beat bigger players in body-to-body collisions, you're just useless.
> Outside of US, American football is often thought of as being all about knocking your opponents down like brutes.


There is so much wrong in this, where to start?
Yes - there are set plays in football, just like there is in war, and in most sports. But the best teams are those who can adapt on the fly to the unknown - what will the defense do? You can have a play to run, and once it gets underway, you find your primary receiver is too well defended, so you (the quarterback) has to quickly adapt. Do you keep it and run, do you seek a secondary receiver? Football has a great deal of stratagem.
Football requires great skill. Can you throw a perfect spiral under significant pressure to another player - not where they are, but where they will be? Can you throw downfield while running backwards? Weave your body through a massive pile of large men? Dodge people who are allowed to throw their entire body at you? Catch a pass under immense pressure?
Look - any and all sports require a great deal of skill. Arguing one is so much more difficult than another is really stupid. It isn't the skill of soccer players that anybody is contesting. It is that so much happens with so little being accomplished. Or the fact that you can go through 90+ minutes of play and end in a tie. Don't get me started with how stupid the offsides penalty is. The theatricality of the flopping. Say what you will about American football players - if they are laying on the ground, it is because they are actually hurt, not just trying to get someone else a yellow or red card, or get a penalty kick.

Soccer is basically a way of letting third world countries think they are actually competitive with the rest of the world. Maybe some of the American sports require particular physiques. But then we also have a broad selection of sports. Football, basketball, baseball, hockey, even soccer. All of those played at a massive level, and both collegiate and professional. Something for everyone.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

I have little interest in soccer, tennis or golf, although I used to play tennis .


----------



## Dan Ante

American football is all about the padding, no trouble. :lol:


----------



## Guest

Dan Ante said:


> American football is all about the padding, no trouble. :lol:


It's all padding, no substance.


----------



## hammeredklavier

DrMike said:


> Soccer is basically a way of letting third world countries think they are actually competitive with the rest of the world.


Again, this is one of the things that truly makes football an ideal sport of equality and universality. How affluent or prosperous, populous a country is shouldn't affect how good it is an a sport. Look how good Uruguay is in World Cup, it's cause everyone there loves the sport. Also, American football doesn't even use feet 90% of the time, how can you call it just 'football', while calling real football 'soccer'.


----------



## Dan Ante

MacLeod said:


> It's all padding, no substance.


Of course it is you don,t want any one to get hurt, harm can come to a young laddie if it is just body to body.


----------



## elgar's ghost

I remember this skit from its inclusion in Ken Burns's film _Baseball_…


----------



## Guest

MacLeod said:


> It's all padding, no substance.


Yeah we use padding - we can see the results down in Australia and New Zealand of playing such a sport with no padding.


----------



## Guest

hammeredklavier said:


> Again, this is one of the things that truly makes football an ideal sport of equality and universality. How affluent or prosperous, populous a country is shouldn't affect how good it is an a sport. Look how good Uruguay is in World Cup, it's cause everyone there loves the sport. Also, American football doesn't even use feet 90% of the time, how can you call it just 'football', while calling real football 'soccer'.


I'm sorry, are we playing a game or trying to achieve global equality?
By the way, evidence suggests that the word "soccer" originated in England, so blame the British. It's only been since the 80s that they really turned away from using the word. Football was the term for several games evolving around the same time, and new terms appear to distinguish them. American football used to involve a lot more kicking the ball, but the rules have evolved over time. Soccer originated around the same time as rugby, another football game.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Padding is also worn in Rugby Union and Rugby League now - players have become fitter, faster and also bigger over the last 20 years so there is more impact approaching that of US Football. The clip below is from well over ten years ago and both of these players were only about 13 stones, so imagine a similar tackle but with two fast blokes weighing 18 stones which is more the norm now.


----------



## Guest

elgars ghost said:


> Padding is also worn in Rugby Union and Rugby League now - players have become fitter, faster and also bigger over the last 20 years so there is more impact approaching that of US Football. The clip below is from well over ten years ago and both of these players were only about 13 stones, so imagine a similar tackle but with two fast blokes weighing 18 stones which is more the norm now.


Certainly makes soccer floppers look like a bunch of pansies.


----------



## Guest

I was making a jesting observation. Some seem to have missed out the critical 'all' in my post. Strangely, I'm well aware of the reasons for the wearing of protective gear in sport.


----------



## eljr

Clouds Weep Snowflakes said:


> Am I like the only guy who doesn't like soccer?


Not likely. Just don't include me in that group.

I have been blessed by this sport in more ways than one. This, in spite of never having seen a soccer ball till I was in college and having never played!

I even recall one day long ago staring up at the sky after a child's soccer match and thanking God for bestowing such joy on me through that match.


----------



## Guest

MacLeod said:


> I was making a jesting observation. Some seem to have missed out the critical 'all' in my post. Strangely, I'm well aware of the reasons for the wearing of protective gear in sport.


If this is directed at my reply to you, then it is hilarious that you would be responding to my jesting comment by complaining that I missed the jest in yours.


----------



## eljr

----------------------------------------------------------


----------



## Dan Ante

elgars ghost said:


> Padding is also worn in Rugby Union and Rugby League now -


Not in NZ the only thing that even approaches that would be a bandage over an injury or wound, you would would be laughed out of the ground with that sort of protection.


----------



## Guest

DrMike said:


> If this is directed at my reply to you, then it is hilarious that you would be responding to my jesting comment by complaining that I missed the jest in yours.


Yes, I missed the jest in yours, but there was another poster who was either jesting themselves or missed mine, or both.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Dan Ante said:


> Not in NZ the only thing that even approaches that would be a bandage over an injury or wound, you would would be laughed out of the ground with that sort of protection.


Well, of course it is optional rather than mandatory - I suppose the point I was trying to make was that wearing padding (as in a tight-fitting under-vest with slightly padded shoulders) is relatively new in the sport.


----------



## Larkenfield

Good match! I find more action and thrills in five minutes of Rugby than in most full-length soccer (the _real_ football) and American football matches.


----------



## Dan Ante

elgars ghost said:


> Well, of course it is optional rather than mandatory - I suppose the point I was trying to make was that wearing padding (as in a tight-fitting under-vest with slightly padded shoulders) is relatively new in the sport.


OK but the only protection that I am aware of that is worn without any shame in fact with pride by some jokers is "the box":cheers: (Cricket)


----------



## CnC Bartok

Dan Ante said:


> OK but the only protection that I am aware of that is worn without any shame in fact with pride by some jokers is "the box":cheers: (Cricket)


I wore my cricket box for years with a great deal of pride, until someone politely pointed out it wasn't actually a face mask.


----------



## Jacck

I just read on the news that we (Czechs) are at war with Scotland. Apparently, Slavia and Rangers started the war.
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/19/...ague-racism-europa-league-spt-intl/index.html
I read that repeated hits with the ball on your head cause brain cells to die


----------



## haziz

No. I don't like all sports, Soccer included! That makes me a bit of an odd man out as an American (meaning USA) male, with zero interest in sports.


----------



## NoCoPilot

The problem with "futbol" (as well as hockey, as amfortas pointed out two years ago), is that the soccer ball (or puck) spends most of its time whizzing back and forth on the field/ring, under nobody's control.

When it impacts a net -- which is rarely -- it seems to be *mostly accidental.*

That's not sport. That's particle physics.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist

Exactly. There's no continuity in the game. You can have a beautiful attack and then once it falls apart it's just done, or you can score the only goal of the game out of nowhere.

I prefer UFC by a long shot. Even more explosive than soccer, but also more continuous.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist

I think baseball is my favorite of the major sports in America. There's something about the structure of the game that gives it a narrative element you don't see often in sports.

I used to love keeping score in my scorebook as a kid. Oftentimes I'd just completely fabricate the games in my imagination and write them down. Man, I got such a kick out of that. Here's one I dug up this morning:









(I've never even been to Baltimore).


----------



## elgar's ghost

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> I think baseball is my favorite of the major sports in America. There's something about the structure of the game that gives it a narrative element you don't see often in sports.
> 
> I used to love keeping score in my scorebook as a kid. Oftentimes I'd just completely fabricate the games in my imagination and write them down. Man, I got such a kick out of that. Here's one I dug up this morning:
> 
> View attachment 153337
> 
> 
> (I've never even been to Baltimore).


I used to occasionally fill in scorecards (or try to) when at cricket games - it took a lot of concentration.


----------



## NoCoPilot

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> I prefer UFC by a long shot. Even more explosive than soccer, but also more continuous.


"UFC" as in Ultimate Fighting, with no rules? Kicking, boxing, tripping, pulling hair, spitting, tripping, tackling....

To my mind that's not "sport" anymore. It's too gladiator.

Or does UFC refer to some fried chicken from Salt Lake?


----------



## kfriegedank

Soccer (other sports are available) now a days are just a money-laundering scheme for white businessmen to make absurdly high amounts of money off large amounts of stupid people... I miss the days when a game of soccer just meant getting in a field, having a game and then going home to bang your wife.
Those were the days.


----------



## arapinho1

You mean football, not soccer


----------



## NoCoPilot

arapinho1 said:


> You mean football, not soccer


"Futbol"


----------



## NoCoPilot

kfriegedank said:


> Soccer (other sports are available) now a days are just a money-laundering scheme for white businessmen to make absurdly high amounts of money off large amounts of stupid people... I miss the days when a game of soccer just meant getting in a field, having a game and then going home to bang your wife.
> Those were the days.


I WONDERED why my wife was so tired on Thursday nights!


----------



## Jacck




----------



## Dan Ante

kfriegedank said:


> Soccer (other sports are available) now a days are just a money-laundering scheme for white businessmen to make absurdly high amounts of money off large amounts of stupid people... I miss the days when a game of soccer just meant getting in a field, having a game and then going home to bang your wife.
> Those were the days.


I think when they made sports professional it took more away from them than it added.


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> I think baseball is my favorite of the major sports in America. There's something about the structure of the game that gives it a narrative element you don't see often in sports.
> .


Really? That's exactly how I feel, but about American Football. There's something about the structure of the game that adds an element of narrative and drama and makes it IMO the ultimate spectator sport.


----------



## Ariasexta

I think it so so, it depends on the situation, it is a kind of the popular guys show in the sense of a T stage for models. It is fun to see the team you like winning as well as to see the team losing you want to see them fail, in my situation, I often watch some sports in expectation to seeing someone lose, that makes more sense to me.


----------



## Rogerx

kfriegedank said:


> Soccer (other sports are available) now a days are just a money-laundering scheme for white businessmen to make absurdly high amounts of money off large amounts of stupid people... I miss the days when a game of soccer just meant getting in a field, having a game and then going home to bang your wife.
> Those were the days.


April fool joke


----------



## Pyotr

Here's a guy who loves his football.


----------



## SanAntone

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> I think baseball is my favorite of the major sports in America. There's something about the structure of the game that gives it a narrative element you don't see often in sports.
> 
> I used to love keeping score in my scorebook as a kid. Oftentimes I'd just completely fabricate the games in my imagination and write them down. Man, I got such a kick out of that. Here's one I dug up this morning:
> 
> View attachment 153337
> 
> 
> (I've never even been to Baltimore).


I agree 100%. Baseball is the greatest game ever invented.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Never really got into soccer, even though my relatives love it. Too much back and forth without scoring for my liking. Boxing is the sport I love watching the most (not so much like doing real sparring, almost got knocked out once). Basketball second.


----------



## Chilham

Rugby is my sport. I played it to quite a high standard back in the 1980s and early 90s. The club I played for spawned a professional club when the sport went in that direction, and I now support them, travelling - pre-COVID - to many away matches and some home games.

Playing sport was always been a part of my life, rugby, cricket, squash, table tennis, and a bit of golf, although I'm now reduced to the armchair on a Saturday and Sunday. I used to enjoy watching American Football but lost interest. Baseball is a part of our family folklore. My son was born during the amazing 1988 World Series. As a family, we watched Roger Clemens and Randy Johnson go head-to-head in 2001, sitting in a Howard Johnson motel eating pepperoni pizza and drinking Bud', as we travelled back to New York from a vacation in New England, and were in Boston in 2004 when the Red Sox, "Reversed the Curse".

To the OP's question, I haven't watched a football match since the World Cup Final in 2010, and I wished that I hadn't watched that.


----------



## HenryPenfold

There is something unfathomably wrong with people who do not like Association Football. They mustn't be trusted.


----------



## elgar's ghost

I've been watching re-runs of late 1970s games on ITV4. Football back then may lack the glamour of the modern game but it seemed far more - what's the word - REAL! Today's whingeing overpaid show ponies wouldn't have lasted half an hour back then - which is exactly the sort of thing father used to say when comparing football in the 1970s to the 1940s and 1950s.


----------



## Eclectic Al

elgars ghost said:


> I've been watching re-runs of late 1970s games on ITV4. Football back then may lack the glamour of the modern game but it seemed far more - what's the word - REAL! Today's whingeing overpaid show ponies wouldn't have lasted half an hour back then - which is exactly the sort of thing father used to say when comparing football in the 1970s to the 1940s and 1950s.


Chopper Harris. Norman Hunter. Those were the days.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Yep - or as the old joke goes: virtually every team had an enforcer - apart from Leeds United, who had eleven. :lol:


----------



## HenryPenfold

"When you played against Tommy Smith, you wore shin pads on your calves, too"


----------



## elgar's ghost

HenryPenfold said:


> "When you played against Tommy Smith, you wore shin pads on your calves, too"


Ain't it the truth? Tommy Smith was a genuinely nasty piece of work.

Actually, Henry, you have my mind ticking over - as so many injuries were/are sustained on the back of the lower leg how come no-one ever invented a shin pad that could go all the way around while also shaped to protect the ankle and Achilles tendon?


----------



## Ingélou

A colleague at the sixth form college we taught at in Norfolk was permanently disabled during a 'friendly' football match in which he was kicked by his oppo - who never apologised. He gave up football and took to surfing instead. Sadly, before his retirement, he had a heart attack while surfing locally and died in his fifties. Such a shame.

So - a whole life shaped by a vicious footballing opponent.


----------



## Chilham

The careers of several talented players were cut-short through injury. Alan Hudson comes to mind but I'm sure there were others.


----------



## Eclectic Al

Ingélou said:


> A colleague at the sixth form college we taught at in Norfolk was permanently disabled during a 'friendly' football match in which he was kicked by his oppo - who never apologised. He gave up football and took to surfing instead. Sadly, before his retirement, he had a heart attack while surfing locally and died in his fifties. Such a shame.
> 
> So - a whole life shaped by a vicious footballing opponent.


The balance is really difficult isn't it. Aside from the question of foul play you have a whole range of risks: early-onset dementia from heading a ball, changes to rules in American Football to reduce the danger of collisions, etc.

The most striking for me is watching cricketers without helmets (and with far less protection in other areas of the body too). Doubtless it was more dangerous, but there is also something so glorious about the sight of players like Gower with no more than a floppy hat.


----------



## Art Rock

Chilham said:


> The careers of several talented players were cut-short through injury. Alan Hudson comes to mind but I'm sure there were others.


Or even worse: by suffering a cardiac arrhythmia attack resulting in permanent brain damage during a pre-season friendly game at age 20: Ajax' Abdelhak Nouri, who was widely seen as one of the greatest talents of his generation.


----------



## mikeh375

elgars ghost said:


> Ain't it the truth? Tommy Smith was a genuinely nasty piece of work.
> 
> Actually, Henry, you have my mind ticking over - as so many injuries were/are sustained on the back of the lower leg how come no-one ever invented a shin pad that could go all the way around while also shaped to protect the ankle and Achilles tendon?


I was in the Kop end at Anfield and witnessed Jan Molby's home debut for Liverpool. He was another bruiser, sort of languid in style and tough but certainly not as tough as Souness.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Eclectic Al said:


> The balance is really difficult isn't it. Aside from the question of foul play you have a whole range of risks: early-onset dementia from heading a ball, changes to rules in American Football to reduce the danger of collisions, etc.
> 
> The most striking for me is watching cricketers without helmets (and with far less protection in other areas of the body too). Doubtless is was more dangerous, but there is also something so glorious about the sight to players like Gower with no more than a floppy hat.


I think Richie Richardson was the last batsman I can recall who went through his entire career without wearing a helmet when batting.


----------



## HenryPenfold

elgars ghost said:


> Ain't it the truth? Tommy Smith was a genuinely nasty piece of work.
> 
> Actually, Henry, you have my mind ticking over - as so many injuries were/are sustained on the back of the lower leg how come no-one ever invented *a shin pad that could go all the way around *while also shaped to protect the ankle and Achilles tendon?


I don't think that would be feasible. I used to wear 2 pairs of shin pads, one firm, one pliable. Covered my ankles too.


----------



## mikeh375

HenryPenfold said:


> I don't think that would be feasible. I used to wear 2 pairs of shin pads, one firm, one pliable. Covered my ankles too.


was that for football Henry?


----------



## Malx

I remember listening to an interview with a forward, whose name I can't recall, whilst reminiscing said when playing against chopper Harris he 'booked' first appointment with the club physio for the Monday morning as a matter of standard practice.

For my sins, I still follow, less actively than in the past but when opportunity allows, Dunfermline Athletic not a big name team but once it's in your blood you stick with it through thick and thin. Lately there has been a lot more thin to deal with - they are live on BBC Scotland TV this evening kicking off at 6.00pm.
So no more music for me this evening but I will open a bottle of the famous Orkney Dark Island - in celebration or to drown my sorrows.


----------



## HenryPenfold

mikeh375 said:


> was that for football Henry?


Yes, for football.

The game was more manly when I played it. We'd run up to one another and cuddle and kiss when we scored and 5 or 6 of us might make a person-heap on the floor, lying on top of one another laughing and giggling. One might get a slap on the bottom from a teammate, for endeavour. Then at the end we'd take all our clothes of and jump into a bath together - lots of horseplay with soap and bubbles. Modern players and the modern 'no contact' game have become effeminate.


----------



## mikeh375

HenryPenfold said:


> Yes, for football.
> 
> The game was more manly when I played it. We'd run up to one another and cuddle and kiss when we scored and 5 or 6 of us might make a person-heap on the floor, lying on top of one another laughing and giggling. One might get a slap on the bottom from a teammate, for endeavour. Then at the end we'd take all our clothes of and jump into a bath together - lots of horseplay with soap and bubbles. Modern players and the modern 'no contact' game have become effeminate.


...that's got me giggling like an idiot and earning me odd looks from the Mrs who's sitting next to me.


----------



## Jacck

HenryPenfold said:


> Yes, for football.
> 
> The game was more manly when I played it. We'd run up to one another and cuddle and kiss when we scored and 5 or 6 of us might make a person-heap on the floor, lying on top of one another laughing and giggling. One might get a slap on the bottom from a teammate, for endeavour. Then at the end we'd take all our clothes of and jump into a bath together - lots of horseplay with soap and bubbles. Modern players and the modern 'no contact' game have become effeminate.


and then you went to The Blue Oyster Bar to have a beer together, no?


----------



## Merl

After the shenanigans of the past few days and my club's disgusting support for the 'Super League' I'm finding it hard to stomach the game I've adored all my life. I've never been so ashamed to be a Blue.


----------



## Art Rock

Most reactions seem to be of disgust and disbelief. Latest news: the UEFA is rumoured to plan to eliminate any of the participating clubs already from this year's Champion's League. Guardiola still without a Champion's League with Man City.....


----------



## Clloydster

I know they're still trying to make soccer work here - I'll take my Braves any day. Keep trying to indoctrinate my grandkids every chance I get, but I guess young kids get into soccer.


----------



## Merl

Art Rock said:


> Most reactions seem to be of disgust and disbelief. Latest news: the UEFA is rumoured to plan to eliminate any of the participating clubs already from this year's Champion's League. Guardiola still without a Champion's League with Man City.....


Tbh, I don't care if they throw us out. We deserve to be thrown out of football. I'm disgusted at the owners of the club Ive loved all my life for doing this. The hardcore fans will boycott City forever if they go ahead with this and I will never watch them again for as long as I live. All those years of great work behind the scenes (rejuvenating the club, the local area, bringing back our old club badge, working hard in the community, creating jobs, investing in the local infrastructure, etc) all ruined by a moment of greed. The fanbases of all the clubs involved will be decimated, hopefully. I just hope our owners change their minds but I don't think they will. This is very, very wrong. I'll leave it there....I'm too angry to talk rationally about it.


----------



## Malx

You'll hate to hear this Merl, but the Man Utd fans who turned their backs on the club and created the club that is now Salford City as a reaction to the involvement of the Glazers and their dodgy financial takeover may now be smuggly sitting saying 'We told you so'.
I am watching the Leeds v Liverpool game on tv at present and normally I'd be a neutral - not tonight!


----------



## elgar's ghost

Yet another excuse to generate more money for the elite. If any genuine fans follow this with any enthusiasm then they are the mugs I always suspected them to be. Any clubs who sign up to this circus should be banned from participating in anything else, and when they see the light and go crawling back then they should be dropped down through the league pyramid. I wonder how many players will stay loyal then.


----------



## Kiki

For years, this Super League proposition has been an effective weapon used by the big clubs to pressurize UEFA into creating a more lucrative deal for the UCL.

They could have kept using this tactic. As long as it remains a threat to UEFA but one that will never materialise, it will continue to work.

I think now their greed has taken over their heads so they want to launch it for real, even though UEFA is set to announce a more lucrative deal for an expanded UCL. Why? Because in order to get a share of the UCL money, first you need to perform well in your domestic leagues, then you need to sustain a good run in the UCL. That’s not guaranteed, especially for English clubs because of the competitiveness in the Premier League, and they don’t like that. 

Perhaps they also feel jealous when they see how Ferrari's vested interest in F1 has got them more prize money than champions Mercedes, so they want to create their own vested interest by creating permanent spots for themselves in a closed competition, so money will be guaranteed.

This Super League would work for them as long as the appeal of their brands remains high (to broadcasters, sponsors, and fans). But this is wrong, because they will not be there on merit. And fans are not stupid. They see through it. All the supporter's groups denounce it. And they have stepped on the lion's tail. UEFA could ban these clubs in Europe. FAs could ban them in domestic leagues. FIFA could ban players in the World Cup. 

They have finally screwed up big time.


----------



## Merl

elgars ghost said:


> Yet another excuse to generate more money for the elite. If any genuine fans follow this with any enthusiasm then they are the mugs I always suspected them to be. Any clubs who sign up to this circus should be banned from participating in anything else, and when they see the light and go crawling back they should be dropped down through the league pyramid. I wonder how many players with stay loyal then.


I agree. 10 of my friends (and my son, a season ticket holder at City since he was 7) have all turned down tickets for the League Cup final on Sunday. I've told him to go with a paper bag on his head with "Ashamed of the owners, proud to be a Blue" written on it but he's so annoyed he's refusing to go. I really can't voice how disgusted I am with our otherwise excellent owners for agreeing to this. I thought they had class and integrity but it seems they're just money-grabbing [email protected] like the Glazers. I've voiced my disgust in an email to the club and posted some rather terse messages to their social media pages. It won't help but at least it makes me feel better. I've said we should do what FC United did and start our own club from the bottom and work our way up. The scary thing is that these Super League clubs think they're on good legal ground and it's unlikely that Uefa and the FA will be able to stop them. We will see what happens. There's a big meeting at Uefa on Friday where its likely that city and Chelsea will be thrown outta this year's champions league.The clubs are ready to challenge this. I will reiterate - dont blame the fans of these clubs. None of us want this! 
This is all a total cluterf*ck. Proud to be a Blue - ashamed of our owners.


----------



## Art Rock

It looks like it's over before it starts.... Man City have already withdrawn, Chelsea is getting out, so is Atletico, and Barcelona's president stated that they will only join if the fans OK it (so, no).


----------



## Art Rock

Man United executive vice-chairman Woodward has resigned, and it is rumoured that the remaining four English teams will follow Man City and Chelsea. This will be a very, very small Superleague....


----------



## joen_cph

Michael Laudrup for example said several days ago, that he didn't expect the project to succeed.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Even if clubs now desperately try to distance themselves from it the initial enthusiasm they had will still be a blot on the 'scutcheon.


----------



## Merl

elgars ghost said:


> Even if clubs now desperately try to distance themselves from it the initial enthusiasm they had will still be a blot on the 'scutcheon.


I agree. It's tarnished us and really upset the fans. We've always backed Mansour and the board as every decision they've made has been good and they've always asked the fans and followed their wishes but this was just plain stupid. However, he won't be the first person to make a ridiculous decision about Europe.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Merl said:


> I agree. It's tarnished us and really upset the fans. We've always backed Mansour and the board as every decision they've made has been good and they've always asked the fans and followed their wishes but this was just plain stupid. _However, he won't be the first person to make a ridiculous decision about Europe_.


Now, now, Merl - there's no need to drag John Major into this. :lol:


----------



## Malx

Manchester City have instigated proceedings to come out of the proposed super league. Some legal issues lie ahead I fancy.


----------



## CnC Bartok

Malx said:


> Manchester City have instigated proceedings to come out of the proposed super league. Some legal issues lie ahead I fancy.


Maybe Dunfermline can take their place? :angel:

Even if (or as) these clubs perform a dramatic U-turn, their support base will take a long time to recover. As a supporter of A Fans' Club, (AFC) it's reassuring to see other clubs are supported by decent human beings too!

All six Premier League clubs have now withdrwan from this hideous project


----------



## Merl

As a City fan I've always been proud of City's past. I was as proud of my team when we were yo-yoing between divisions. I've followed City everywhere from Barnsley to Lincoln to Gillingham to Wembley, Anfield and the Swamp. Now I want an apology from the board. They let us down badly and f"cked up and then made us ashamed of our club. Us City fans are a loyal lot. We don't demand success like some glory-hunting clubs as we were brought up on a diet of sh1te. When we sing "we're not really here" we mean it. Every day watching Pep's team is wonderful. If it ended tomorrow I wouldn't complain. It's been amazing. Every City fan I have on my social media is a) Mancunian B) goes to every home game (and many follow City away from home). The only reason I don't go any more is I live 300 miles away now so I had to give up my long-standing season ticket. It was nice to see the comments from Pep and the players (de Bruyne, Laporte, etc) this afternoon. No one wanted this cretinous Super League and now it seems like it's finally dead in the water. The annoying thing is that we got dragged down to the level of a few clubs who have been after doing this for years (no names but one American-led club have been pushing this for years due to their massive levels of debt). Hopefully the board have learned their lesson. Mansour and the board now need to go on a public charm exercise to quell the bad feeling created by this farce. I really don't think they realised how much we love the club. We don't give a rats @rse about playing Barcelona or Real Madrid. We only care about trying to win our national league, beating the tourists from Stretford and and watching good football). We hate Uefa too (their role in creating this division through their own corruptiom has not gone unnoticed). The fans have won for now. When City's main fan group (the 15,000 strong '1894 Group' ) removed their support for City and refused the City board the option of using all their flags and banners to decorate the Stadium the board knew they'd really upset us. City's 2nd and 3rd largest fan groups withdrew all support this morning too, meaning that almost 30,000 fans would not be renewing season tickets or buying merchandise the penny finally dropped. Even the City food bank group (my son is one of those who help collect for them) withdrew from having anything to do with them. Perhaps the thought of playing Real Madrid in a 67, 000 seater stadium with less than 6, 000 fans in it (less than 10% of fans said they would ever set foot in the stadium again) terrified them. I don't know. I'll give them till weekend and we may get an apology but don't hold yer breath for one from the likes of Levy or The Glaziers. More chance of finding a Mancunian in the Stretford End.


----------



## Richannes Wrahms

I don't like sports. I like balls though.


----------



## Malx

Merl said:


> As a City fan I've always been proud of City's past. I was as proud of my team when we were yo-yoing between divisions. I've followed City everywhere from Barnsley to Lincoln to Gillingham to Wembley, Anfield and the Swamp. Now I want an apology from the board. They let us down badly and f"cked up and then made us ashamed of our club. Us City fans are a loyal lot. We don't demand success like some glory-hunting clubs as we were brought up on a diet of sh1te. When we sing "we're not really here" we mean it. Every day watching Pep's team is wonderful. If it ended tomorrow I wouldn't complain. It's been amazing. Every City fan I have on my social media is a) Mancunian B) goes to every home game (and many follow City away from home). The only reason I don't go any more is I live 300 miles away now so I had to give up my long-standing season ticket. It was nice to see the comments from Pep and the players (de Bruyne, Laporte, etc) this afternoon. No one wanted this cretinous Super League and now it seems like it's finally dead in the water. The annoying thing is that we got dragged down to the level of a few clubs who have been after doing this for years (no names but one American-led club have been pushing this for years due to their massive levels of debt). Hopefully the board have learned their lesson. Mansour and the board now need to go on a public charm exercise to quell the bad feeling created by this farce. I really don't think they realised how much we love the club. We don't give a rats @rse about playing Barcelona or Real Madrid. We only care about trying to win our national league, beating the tourists from Stretford and and watching good football). We hate Uefa too (their role in creating this division through their own corruptiom has not gone unnoticed). The fans have won for now. When City's main fan group (the 15,000 strong '1894 Group' ) removed their support for City and refused the City board the option of using all their flags and banners to decorate the Stadium the board knew they'd really upset us. City's 2nd and 3rd largest fan groups withdrew all support this morning too, meaning that almost 30,000 fans would not be renewing season tickets or buying merchandise the penny finally dropped. Even the City food bank group (my son is one of those who help collect for them) withdrew from having anything to do with them. Perhaps the thought of playing Real Madrid in a 67, 000 seater stadium with less than 6, 000 fans in it (less than 10% of fans said they would ever set foot in the stadium again) terrified them. I don't know. I'll give them till weekend and we may get an apology but don't hold yer breath for one from the likes of Levy or The Glaziers. More chance of finding a Mancunian in the Stretford End.


Spoken from the heart - respect :tiphat:


----------



## Malx

CnC Bartok said:


> *Maybe Dunfermline can take their place?* :angel:
> 
> Even if (or as) these clubs perform a dramatic U-turn, their support base will take a long time to recover. As a supporter of A Fans' Club, (AFC) it's reassuring to see other clubs are supported by decent human beings too!
> 
> All six Premier League clubs have now withdrwan from this hideous project


As a serial yo-yo club we really would feel out of place and with access to all that money what would we the supporters have to complain about?
Plus we'd miss the salty spray hitting us in face when playing at Gayfield whilst in the midst of an easterly gale - ah memories!
Not to mention the famous Kilmarnock pies.....


----------



## Merl

Malx said:


> As a serial yo-yo club we really would feel out of place and with access to all that money what would we the supporters have to complain about?
> Plus we'd miss the salty spray hitting us in face when playing at Gayfield whilst in the midst of an easterly gale - ah memories!
> Not to mention the famous Kilmarnock pies.....


Respect... Spoken from the heart.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

I think that if the field/pitch were about half as large as it is, I would find soccer/football much more interesting. As it stands, I find it extremely dull as there are very few real scoring chances. I am a big fan of the North American “Big 4.”


----------



## Malx

My understanding is that the difference between the US ideals in sport and the UK/Europe will always be light years apart and that is why the American venture capitalist owners really don't understand the history, the feel, the ties to communities that exist between UK football clubs and their fans. If they see that this history and the fanbase is going to restrict their ability to grow their returns on investment then the answer is simple - sell and go.


----------



## Jacck

Malx said:


> My understanding is that the difference between the US ideals in sport and the UK/Europe will always be light years apart and that is why the American venture capitalist owners really don't understand the history, the feel, the ties to communities that exist between UK football clubs and their fans. If they see that this history and the fanbase is going to restrict their ability to grow their returns on investment then the answer is simple - sell and go.


aren't most of the UK football clubs owned by the Russian oligarchs?

Premier League

Arsenal - Stan Kroenke (USA)
Bournemouth - Maxim Demin (Russia)
Burnley - Mike Garlick (England)
Chelsea - Roman Abramovich (Russia)
Crystal Palace - Steve Parish (England), Joshua Harris & David Blitzer (USA)
Everton - Farhad Moshiri (Iran)
Hull - Assem Allam (Egypt)
Leicester - Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha (Thailand)
Liverpool - John W. Henry, Tom Werner (USA)
Manchester City - Sheikh Mansour (UAE)
Manchester United - Glazer family (USA)
Middlesbrough - Steve Gibson (England)
Southampton - Katharina Liebherr (Germany)
Stoke - Peter Coates (England)
Sunderland - Ellis Short (USA)
Swansea - Jason Levien & Steve Kaplan (USA)
Tottenham - Joe Lewis (England)
Watford - Pozzo family (Italy)
West Brom - Jeremy Peace (England)
West Ham - David Gold & David Sullivan (England)


----------



## Eclectic Al

I like a lot about how the NFL organise their teams. As someone from the UK I don't understand all the detail, but what I can see is an attempt to avoid teams being able to spend their way to success - the draft, salary caps, etc. And then you have the way the thing being broken up into small groups (NFC East, AFC Central, etc) keeps a large number of teams in the picture for making it to the knock-out stages for much of the regular season. It also seems like the administrators of the sport are always looking at how it plays out, and seeking to avoid developments that will allow dominant teams to develop. There are massive egos among the owners of NFL teams, but they don't seem to be able to buy success like you can in European football leagues.

Doubtless someone from the US will tell me that I am naive, but it does seem to work better than the approach in the UK (and indeed much of Europe), where it's nearly always one from a handful of teams who win everything. Why was it so good when Leicester won the league? Because it is so rare.


----------



## Jacck

Eclectic Al said:


> I like a lot about how the NFL organise their teams. As someone from the UK I don't understand all the detail, but what I can see is an attempt to avoid teams being able to spend their way to success - the draft, salary caps, etc. And then you have the way the thing being broken up into small groups (NFC East, AFC Central, etc) keeps a large number of teams in the picture for making it to the knock-out stages for much of the regular season. It also seems like the administrators of the sport are always looking at how it plays out, and seeking to avoid developments that will allow dominant teams to develop. There are massive egos among the owners of NFL teams, but they don't seem to be able to buy success like you can in European football leagues


I don't know about NFL, but I know that NHL is all about buying the victory, because they buy the best players. Most Czech hockey players who were/are any good end up in the NHL, because they earn much better money that they would at home. So the NHL teams are composed of various purchased players. The more you pay, the better players you can afford.


----------



## Pyotr

The NHL has a hard salary cap and it's the hardest (of the four,i.e., NFL, NBA, MLB) to buy a championship. Major league baseball(MLB) has a soft cap which allows team to spend as much as they want but must pay a tax to the league if they spend over a certain amount, which is $197M this year, per team.
In all four U.S. sports, all teams must play every game in THAT league. The whole structure of Euro football is confusing to me with it's different "leagues." 
I guess I'm an outlier here in that I was looking forward to the Super league. I've only been following the Premier league for about five years. Manchester United is my adopted team. I watch every Premier league game for a handful of teams, (on TV only since I've never been to the UK). One thing is certain, I've never watched a Burnley vs. Brighton match, etc, . I was looking forward to watching and learning about those other six teams that were going to be part of the Super league.


----------



## Malx

Jacck said:


> aren't most of the UK football clubs owned by the Russian oligarchs?
> 
> Premier League
> 
> Arsenal - Stan Kroenke (USA)
> Bournemouth - Maxim Demin (Russia)
> Burnley - Mike Garlick (England)
> Chelsea - Roman Abramovich (Russia)
> Crystal Palace - Steve Parish (England), Joshua Harris & David Blitzer (USA)
> Everton - Farhad Moshiri (Iran)
> Hull - Assem Allam (Egypt)
> Leicester - Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha (Thailand)
> Liverpool - John W. Henry, Tom Werner (USA)
> Manchester City - Sheikh Mansour (UAE)
> Manchester United - Glazer family (USA)
> Middlesbrough - Steve Gibson (England)
> Southampton - Katharina Liebherr (Germany)
> Stoke - Peter Coates (England)
> Sunderland - Ellis Short (USA)
> Swansea - Jason Levien & Steve Kaplan (USA)
> Tottenham - Joe Lewis (England)
> Watford - Pozzo family (Italy)
> West Brom - Jeremy Peace (England)
> West Ham - David Gold & David Sullivan (England)


Fair point Jacck - but my main point is the owners have to accept and understand the relationship between the clubs they have invested in, the communities the clubs have grown from and of course the supporters. 
The owners of the clubs that were looking to join the now floundering 'Super League' completely misjudged the reaction they would get by simply chasing the gold at the end of this non-exsistent rainbow.
Greed is not one of the deadly sins for no reason.
Others can talk about the English league better than I - being in Scotland we have a very minor league that doesn't have the same issues to deal with as the big European leagues.


----------



## science

I intend to go to an open mic night sometime and try my luck at stand-up comedy. One of the jokes I'm working on is about baseball cards, American cards, etc., kind of acting out playing with them with my hands as I do the monologue, something like:



> I really envy Korean boys. Like 5th graders, sixth graders. Boy they have a good life. You know, when I was a kid, I had to play with baseball and football cards. "Nolan Ryan throws a fastball, hits Kirk Gibson in the arm! Gibson charges the mound! The fight's on!" Or "Joe Montana drops back to pass, Reggie White drops him for a sack! What a hit! That had to hurt!"
> 
> But now that I'm older, more mature, I have a bigger picture of the world, and I don't play those games any more. But I really envy Korean boys that age. But, I guess I have to admit I shouldn't feel too sorry for my younger self. Imagine being a European boy trying to play with soccer cards. "Maradona flops! Platini flops! Everybody flops! Red cards for everyone!"
> 
> I mean the cards flop all by themselves, right? You're not even really playing anything.
> 
> But man, these Korean boys, whew. Can you imagine? They get the prostitute cards.
> 
> You know the prostitute cards? You see them laying around on the sidewalks in front of hotels, singing rooms, just all over the place downtown? With the nearly naked girls on them and the phone numbers, and if you call them up then a woman will come to your hotel room or whatever? You all know those cards. The woman who comes to your room is like the girl in the picture's grandmother or something. I mean, that's what I've heard, I don't actually know. Anyway, like she's trying to raise money to buy some proper clothing for her granddaughter, you know? Like the cards are actually supposed to make you feel sorry for the poor girls who can only afford underwear.
> 
> Anyway, imagine having those cards to play with when you're a kid. "Schoolgirl feels dirty. Cheerleader's gonna give her a bath." Hell, I'm all grown-up, I still like to play that game!


I think if I can get the delivery right, a crowd of expats and internationally-minded Koreans would enjoy that.


----------



## eljr

Clouds Weep Snowflakes said:


> What's the all enthusiasm about this? I mean, just 22 people chasing a ball; even Shostakovich used to watch Zenit Saint Petersburg/Leningrad regularly, and some people even said I'm not "a real man" because I don't like soccer; any opinion(s) on this issue from either gender?


It is difficult to watch as an American as it's so poorly officiated and more than other sports, dishonest.

I am watch England vs USA women right now and the officials literally gave a goal to England and took one from the USA, all in 30 minutes. Also, they gave England a goal kick instead of the USA a corner kick. Then, as they gave the lead to England, to keep the game short, they added 3 minutes of stoppage time when clearly it was over 10 minutes of real stoppage.


----------



## Highwayman

eljr said:


> It is difficult to watch as an American as it's so poorly officiated and more than other sports, dishonest.
> 
> I am watch England vs USA women right now and the officials literally gave a goal to England and took one from the USA, all in 30 minutes. Also, they gave England a goal kick instead of the USA a corner kick. Then, as they gave the lead to England, to keep the game short, they added 3 minutes of stoppage time when clearly it was over 10 minutes of real stoppage.







If you look at this video, around 4:25 it looks like the defender makes a contact with Bronze after she plays the ball with her head. The contact might not be to the face but still, there is a contact when the attacker has the control of the ball. So the penalty call is valid. Even if there was no contact at all the referee might have called an indirect free kick because of the defender`s kick was too high. I get why do you say dishonest, Bronze certainly gives a theatrical performance but I think she does that to bring VAR`s attention to the position. She is an experienced player and she probably guessed that the referee might have missed the position. So yes, I guess her little bit of acting made the difference and caused the penalty call but I wouldn`t call that particularly dishonest because there _is_ a contact that would require a penalty. 

It`s a shame that the US goal was disallowed but if you look at 6:42 it`s too close that it could have gone both ways. It`s imperceptible to my eyes but my instinct says it must be offside because their feet looks on the same line but the attacker is facing the right side of the defender so I`d think her left shoulder would be the closest point to the England goal. We must trust the legitimacy of the semi-automatically generated offside lines otherwise we might go back to the pre-VAR era when everything was much more dubious.


----------



## eljr

Highwayman said:


> If you look at this video, around 4:25 it looks like the defender makes a contact with Bronze after she plays the ball with her head. The contact might not be to the face but still, there is a contact when the attacker has the control of the ball. So the penalty call is valid. Even if there was no contact at all the referee might have called an indirect free kick because of the defender`s kick was too high. I get why do you say dishonest, Bronze certainly gives a theatrical performance but I think she does that to bring VAR`s attention to the position. She is an experienced player and she probably guessed that the referee might have missed the position. So yes, I guess her little bit of acting made the difference and caused the penalty call but I wouldn`t call that particularly dishonest because there _is_ a contact that would require a penalty.
> 
> It`s a shame that the US goal was disallowed but if you look at 6:42 it`s too close that it could have gone both ways. It`s imperceptible to my eyes but my instinct says it must be offside because their feet looks on the same line but the attacker is facing the right side of the defender so I`d think her left shoulder would be the closest point to the England goal. We must trust the legitimacy of the semi-automatically generated offside lines otherwise we might go back to the pre-VAR era when everything was much more dubious.


Thanks for your comments. ********.

The offensive player was lowering her head, it was so low it should never have been more than a free kick. 
The US goal disallowed was horse ****, on this we agree. 

I just don't understand why soccer, or should I say corrupt FIFA, can't get officiating right when the rest of the world has no problem. 

What's with the clock? In this day in age? They just wing it. Look to women's college soccer. It's so simple to keep accurate time. So simple.

And as to yesterday, how about the lineman. A CLEAR corner kick for the USA awarded a goal kick for the home team.


----------



## Chat Noir

I dislike football (Association Football) rather intensely these days. Playing it at any rate, though I would sometimes watch repeated '70s (and older games) on television. Those games from before it became demented and completely flushed with money. Also before the idiotic spectacle of clubs floated on the stock exchange, people halfway across the world being 'Manchester United fans' and most of the players being purchased from foreign clubs.

I find football (Association Football) to be a cult. Rugby isn't far behind. American Football is perhaps equally so and even more of a circus as presented. It's also not very healthy for the players over time.


----------



## eljr

delete


----------



## bagpipers

I hate soccer ,very few in the US like soccer ,I'm not against international sports ,I love Golf but for the more physical sports I like American baseball and football.
Soccer absolutely makes me puke!!!!


----------



## Chat Noir

bagpipers said:


> I hate soccer ,very few in the US like soccer ,I'm not against international sports ,I love Golf but for the more physical sports I like American baseball and football.
> Soccer absolutely makes me puke!!!!


It might be because the Americans are just no good at football. Footballers whose career is coming to an end or they're drunks or something, like George Best, usually get transferred to U.S. clubs for enormous fees where they are again the best player in the entire league.

American football is just rugby in a helmet. Baseball is rounders.


----------



## bagpipers

Chat Noir said:


> American football is just rugby in a helmet. Baseball is rounders.


Yea true,yea American baseball and cricket came out of rounders.
Believe it or not Golf actually goes back to the 1400's


----------



## eljr

bagpipers said:


> I hate soccer ,very few in the US like soccer ,I'm not against international sports ,I love Golf but for the more physical sports I like American baseball and football.
> Soccer absolutely makes me puke!!!!


A few things... soccer is VERY popular in America. It's 2022. Coincidentally I just read yesterday about sport popularity in the USA and I was shocked to see soccer ahead of basketball. 


next, more physical sports, baseball? Baseball is not a very physical sport at all. It's more like a fat lazy man's recreational activity. Baseball players don't even run to first base anymore. They stand still and admire how the fly out. Golf is like fishing or meditation. I never did understand why it was considered as a sport by some.


----------



## eljr

Chat Noir said:


> It might be because the Americans are just no good at football.


Then why did the European Champ, England women have to have the refs cheat to get a win which is what my thread was about Friday.

FYI, on the men's side, the best American soccer players play in Europe.

On the women's side, the best league is in the USA. Heck, A few years ago I read that the ACC, a women's college league was one of the top 6 leagues in the world. A college league!

So you can shove that Americans are not good at football crap. Europe simple evolved the best men's leagues which source talent from around the globe. Let's just keep it real, shall we?

Thanks.


----------



## Chat Noir

eljr said:


> Golf is like fishing or meditation. I never did understand why it was considered as a sport by some.


Yes, it is a bit. what I've noticed is that in places other than Britain golf is always a 'money' sport. In England you could always go to a local golf links for a few pounds and play front 9/back 9 or all 18 and just take a few clubs (driver, 3 & 7 irons, sand wedge, and a putter). Or go down to a driving range. Elsewhere they all go full monty with the clubs and it's something for the rich to do once they've 'made it'. I'm not saying that's not also done in UK, but elsewhere there doesn't seem to be golf for all.


----------



## Chat Noir

eljr said:


> Then why did the European Champ, England have to have the refs cheat to get a win which is what this thread is about.
> 
> FYI, the best American soccer players play in Europe.
> 
> On the women's side, the best league is in the USA. Heck, A few years ago I read that the ACC, a women's college league was one of the top 6 leagues in the world. A college league!
> 
> So you can shove that Americans are not good at football crap. Europe simple evolved the best men's leagues which source talent from around the globe. Let's just keep it real, shall we?
> 
> Thanks.


Well of course they play in the Euro leagues. They're not going to find any competition at home! Okay, I was needling, don't take it too hard.
Perhaps women in the U.S. have made football their own aside from games where it was historically hard to ever participate like American football (and it wasn't as suppressed). The women's team has indeed performed impeccably internationally.


----------



## Forster

There's always plenty of competing opinions about the decisions referees give. Assuming that they are making the wrong decisions because of corruption at FIFA is somewhat far-fetched. England beat the USA in a very tight game. I didn't see much of it, but the ref giving a pen to the US when the ball clearly struck the defender's bottom is a good example of the value of VAR. However, VAR isn't perfect either; it is as dependent on human judgement, and therefore human error, as the onfield officials.

People make mistakes.


----------



## Forster

"Am I like the only guy who doesn't like soccer?"

I'm tempted to say that since I've never met the only guy who doesn't like soccer, I've no idea if you're like him.

And as for your comment that soccer is just 22 guys chasing a ball, I'm sure not only all sport, but all endeavour could be reduced to the absurd if one was minded to.

I've often wondered why golfers don't just stand so much nearer the hole instead of 350 yards away. It would make getting the ball in to it so much easier.


----------



## eljr

Forster said:


> There's always plenty of competing opinions about the decisions referees give.


4 decisions that all went against the USA in the first half non against England. Oh, what a coincident. USA won 2-1. The officials changed that to 2-1 England.(and maybe it would have been 3-1 USA)

Peace


----------



## Forster

eljr said:


> 4 decisions that all went against the USA in the first half non against England. Oh, what a coincident. USA won 2-1. The officials changed that to 2-1 England.(and maybe it would have been 3-1 USA)
> 
> Peace


Given previous ties where the US were just as willing to game the referee, and decisions "went the wrong way", don't expect any sympathy from me on this occasion. Besides, media write-ups of the game make no mention of contested decisions. For example

U.S. Women’s National Team Falls To England 2-1 At Packed Wembley Stadium (ussoccer.com)


----------



## eljr

Forster said:


> Given previous ties where the US were just as willing to game the referee, and decisions "went the wrong way", don't expect any sympathy from me on this occasion. Besides, media write-ups of the game make no mention of contested decisions. For example
> 
> U.S. Women’s National Team Falls To England 2-1 At Packed Wembley Stadium (ussoccer.com)


That the USA would lose to England without assistance, just silly.


----------



## Luchesi

bagpipers said:


> Yea true,yea American baseball and cricket came out of rounders.
> Believe it or not Golf actually goes back to the 1400's


Gentlemen Only, Ladies Forbidden


----------



## eljr

Luchesi said:


> Gentlemen only, Ladies Forbidden


Oh yes, the good ole days! lol


----------



## bagpipers

Luchesi said:


> Gentlemen only, Ladies Forbidden


As like the F word golf is not an acronym ,it came from the medieval Dutch word Kolve meaning "club" and evolved from there.
The F word came from the old Norse word fukka meaning intercourse and evolved into a slur in old English and had nothing to do with unlawful carnal knowledge.


----------



## Luchesi

wow


----------



## hammeredklavier

Luchesi said:


> Gentlemen Only, Ladies Forbidden


Girls Only, Lads Forbidden


----------



## Forster

Luchesi said:


> wow


I wouldn't have to put my Coke down of course


----------

